TN 295 
.114 



No. 9102 






**<♦' 











-,: j^\ v^pPv «/\. 



- r^ :iM: ^^ "JIBS' \>& 







T. s * . 'V 



^\ 






















1 *'*^L'* ^ 













,* V \ 




/\m^ 



o . » • . V \3, 

0^ 










k v«\ 



.• a"** °i/w: ^°iv, -^ 



^^ r 



.<>** 



r oY 












a* v< * 












■a- r CV * 









' /UK- %,** •#; \/ ••«*; V** 



L ^p a^ *€Sii^ s %c at *, 








"oV 




* * 



:- **o« • 









A v \s *3 5 A 



-', 



"^O* 












.&*• ^ ■♦/? -a 
















V 




V *'V% *> 






V?- V 












•/ V^-V V % ^\/ °^^- , %o v^'^' ^V^^^Z 











:• "^ a 




%# 



^ * 















/>>■ T ^ 



,',V- 



" <$ 




'of 










.* ^o^ i 




o V 




h." ^ c* * 






• .^ ** •-5w^»* . <? ^ •: 



^-v 







o, *^r."* a 








* o 



>* A 



A ss v "V 



<r 













^0^ 










v^rS«\^- °^**.t;-^ V'*^>\^ °^*^-\f° .. ^ 




^°^ 



^^. 




^^ 










v ^o 









a ' ^ A v "i: 

1 '" - "^A ,-0 0° °" O 




Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1986 



Lithium Availability— Market 
Economy Countries 

A Minerals Availability Appraisal 

By D. I. Bleiwas and J. S. Coffman 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



Information Circular 9102 



Lithium Availability— Market 
Economy Countries 

A Minerals Availability Appraisal 

By D. I. Bleiwas and J. S. Coffman 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Donald Paul Hodel, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 
Robert C. Horton, Director 



age. 






As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has 
responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This 
includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish 
and wildlife, preserving the environment and cultural values of our national parks and 
historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. 
The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that 
their development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has 
a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who 
live in island territories under U.S. administration. 




Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 



Bleiwas, Donald I. 
Lithium availability— market economy countries. 

(Information circular; 9102) 

Bibliography: p. ^3 

Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27: 9102 

1. Lithium industry. 2. Lithium mines and mining. I. Coffman, Joseph S. II. Ti- 
tle. III. Series: Information circular (United States. Bureau of Mines); 9102. 

TN295.U4 [HD9539.L582] 622 s [338.27499] 86-600193 



Ill 



PREFACE 

The Bureau of Mines is assessing the worldwide availability of selected minerals 
of economic significance, most of which are also critical minerals. The Bureau iden- 
tifies, collects, compiles, and evaluates information on producing, developing, and ex- 
plored deposits, and mineral processing plants worldwide. Objectives are to classify both 
domestic and foreign resources, to identify by cost evaluation those demonstrated 
resources that are reserves, and to prepare analyses of mineral availability. 

This report is one of a continuing series of reports that analyze the availability of 
minerals from domestic and foreign sources. Questions about, or comments on, these 
reports should be addressed to Chief, Division of Minerals Availability, Bureau of Mines, 
2401 E St., NW., Washington, DC 20241. 



CONTENTS 



Page 



Preface iii 

Abstract 1 

Introduction 2 

Methodology 2 

Background and uses 3 

Market structure 4 

Production 4 

Geology 4 

Pegmatites 4 

Clays 5 

Brines 5 

Resources 5 

Operation summaries 9 

Pegmatites 9 

Australia 9 

Canada 10 

Bernic Lake area 10 

Bernic Lake 10 

Buck-Coe-Pegli 10 

Lac la Croix 11 

Lake Nipigon region 11 

Georgia Lake 11 

Jean Lake 11 

Nama Creek 11 

Quebec lithium 11 

Yellowknife area 12 



Page 

United States (North Carolina tin- 

spodumene belt) 12 

Geology 13 

Resources 13 

Mining 13 

Beneficiation 13 

Li 2 Co 3 production 13 

Zaire 13 

Zimbabwe 14 

Brines 14 

Bolivia 15 

Chile 15 

United States 15 

Production costs 16 

Mining and beneficiation costs 16 

Lithium brines 16 

Transportation 17 

Lithium availability 17 

Total availability 18 

Canada 18 

Brines 19 

Annual availability 19 

Producing properties 20 

Nonproducing properties 20 

Summary 22 

Conclusions 22 

References 23 



ILLUSTRATIONS 



Page 



1. Mineral resource classification categories 6 

2. Lithium mine and deposit locations 7 

3. Comparison of demonstrated and inferred lithium resources contained in pegmatites and brines .... 8 

4. Percentage share of total recoverable lithium equivalents by mine status and country 8 

5. Distribution of recoverable lithium equivalents within ore types 9 

6. Spodumene concentrate availability from nonproducing Canadian properties at 0- and 15-pct 

DCFROR 19 

7. Annual spodumene concentrate availability from nonproducing properties at 0- and 15-pct DCFROR 21 

TABLES 



1. Byproduct commodity prices used in economic evaluations 3 

2. World lithium production, 1980-84 4 

3. Principal lithium pegmatite minerals 5 

4. Estimated average element content of some brines 5 

5. MEC lithium resources 6 

6. MEC lithium mine and deposit data 7 

7. Bernic Lake deposit resources 10 

8. Demonstrated lithium pegmatite resources in the Yellowknife area 12 

9. Demonstrated lithium brine resources used in this study 15 

10. Element resources, Salar de Atacama, Chile 15 

11. Lithium concentrate transportation costs 17 

12. Potential annual lithium production from producing mines and undeveloped deposits 20 





UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 


°c 


degree Celsius lb 


pound 


cm 


centimeter m 


meter 


d/yr 


days per year mt 


metric ton 


$/lb 


U.S. dollars per pound mt/d 


metric ton per day 


$/mt 


U.S. dollars per metric ton mt/yr 


metric ton per year 


ha 


hectare pet 


percent 


km 


kilometer tr oz/mt 


troy ounce per metric ton 


km 2 


square kilometer yr 


year 



LITHIUM AVAILABILITY — MARKET ECONOMY COUNTRIES 
A Minerals Availability Appraisal 

By D. I. Bleiwas 1 and J. S. Coffman 1 



ABSTRACT 

The Bureau of Mines determined the costs associated with lithium production (in 
various products) from demonstrated resources in seven market economy countries 
(MEC's). This analysis evaluated the relative economic and resource position of 16 mines 
or deposits, including 6 producers and 1 (Bernic Lake) operating at pilot scale. The 
demonstrated resource of recoverable lithium within the deposits studied is approximate- 
ly 2.2 million metric tons (mt). Virtually all known MEC resources and production were 
covered, including resources in Chile (59 pet of the total), the United States (13 pet), 
Australia (11 pet), Canada (10 pet), and Bolivia, Zaire, and Zimbabwe (combined 7 pet). 
In addition, the large potential of lithium-enriched brines is assessed, especially those 
in the Atacama Basin, Chile, where production began in 1984. 

The lithium resource consists of lithium in spodumene, brines, and to a small ex- 
tent lepidolite and petalite. Most MEC lithium trade originates from the United States, 
though development of brine deposits in Chile, and potential development in Bolivia, 
could threaten the U.S. position. Economic analysis indicated that all lithium being 
recovered from producing properties could be produced at less than the published market 
price, and that MEC resources from these properties are adequate to supply any 
foreseeable demand. 

'Physical scientist, Minerals Availability Field Office, Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO. 



INTRODUCTION 



The purpose of this report is to identify and define 
demonstrated lithium resources and evaluate the potential 
production from 3 domestic mines and from 13 mines and 
deposits in 6 foreign countries. Another purpose was to 
evaluate at least 85 pet of lithium resources and 85 pet of 
lithium production from producing operations in market 
economy countries (MEC's). 

The procedures for this study included the identifica- 
tion of lithium resources and the collection of the engineer- 
ing and economic parameters that affect production or pro- 
posed production from the deposits selected for evaluation. 
The information, obtained by Pincock, Allen & Holt Co., 
Inc., on the 13 foreign mines and deposits was collected 
under competitive contract J0255018. Foreign data were 
obtained by the contractor through acquisition of publica- 



tions, meetings with company officials, and, in several cases, 
actual site visits by their personnel. Demonstrated and, if 
possible, identified resources and grades were defined; 
capital investment and operating costs were obtained or 
estimated as well as transportation costs to postmill proc- 
essing destinations. As necessary, the data were modified 
or updated by the Bureau's Minerals Availability Field Of- 
fice personnel in Denver, CO. For the domestic operations, 
data were collected by the Bureau's Field Operations 
Centers. 

Of the 23 lithium mines and deposits initially in- 
vestigated, 7 were excluded because of the small size of the 
demonstrated resource or insufficient data to complete an 
evaluation. 



METHODOLOGY 



The Bureau of Mines is developing a continuously ex- 
panding data base for the analysis of mineral resource 
availability. An integral part of this program is the Sup- 
ply Analysis Model (SAM), developed by personnel of the 
Bureau's Minerals Availability Field Office (3). 2 This in- 
teractive computer system is an effective tool for analyz- 
ing the economic availability of world resources. 

The geologic aspects particular to the lithium operations 
included in this study were determined in order to develop 
estimates of the demonstrated resources, in situ grades, and 
production costs. For each operation evaluated, actual or 
estimated capital expenditures were included for explora- 
tion, acquisition, development, mine plant, mine equipment, 
and mill plant and equipment. Capital costs for the min- 
ing and processing facilities include expenditures for mobile 
and stationary equipment, construction, engineering, in- 
frastructure, and working capital. Infrastructure is a broad 
category that includes cost for access to the mine and its 
associated facilities, ports, water supply and treatment, 
power supply, and personnel accommodations. Working 
capital is a revolving cash fund intended for covering 
operating expenses such as labor, supplies, insurance, and 
taxes. All costs are in terms of January 1984 U.S. dollars. 

The initial capital costs for producing mines and 
developed deposits have been depreciated according to the 
actual investment year, and the undepreciated portion was 
treated as a remaining capital investment in 1984. 
Reinvestments varied according to capacity, production life, 
age of facilities, and company philosophy. All costs were 
originally in January 1982 dollars but have been updated 
to January 1984 U.S. dollars by the use of local currency 
factors and individual country inflation indexes, weighted 
proportionately by the effect of labor, energy, and capital 
in the lithium industry on a countrywide basis. 

The total operating cost estimated for a mining opera- 
tion is a combination of direct and indirect costs. Direct 
operating costs include those costs associated with opera- 
tion and maintenance, labor, supplies, supervision, payroll 
overhead, insurance, local taxation, and utilities. The in- 



'Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references 
at the end of this report. 



direct operating costs include those costs associated with 
technical and clerical labor, administrative costs, 
maintenance of the facilities, and research. Other costs in 
the analyses include standard deductibles such as deprecia- 
tion, depletion, deferred expenses, investment tax credits, 
and tax loss carryforwards. 

After the engineering parameters and associated costs 
for the evaluated lithium deposits were established, the 
SAM system was used to perform economic evaluations that 
permit estimation of the availability of lithium. 

Specifically, the SAM system is an economic evaluation 
simulator that is used to determine the average total cost 
of lithium or mineral commodity produced as specified rates 
over the estimated life of each operation including a 
prespecified discounted-cash-flow rate of return (DCFROR) 
on investments, less all byproduct revenues. This average 
total cost represents the constant-dollar, long-run price at 
which the primary commodity must be sold to recapture all 
costs of lithium production including a prespecified 
DCFROR. 

For this study, DCFROR's of and 15 pet were specified 
when determining the long-run cost of production over the 
life of a property. The 0-pct DCFROR is used to determine 
the breakeven cost, where revenues are sufficient to recover 
total investment and production costs over the operation's 
life but provide no positive rate of return. This rate could 
be adequate for a project that seeks primarily a market 
share or where other advantages such as social benefits, 
foreign exchange, introduction of new technology, or expec- 
tation of better market prices would offset the lack of prof- 
itability. A 0-pct DCFROR could also be acceptable for some 
government-operated mining ventures. The 15-pct DCFROR 
reflects the estimated minimum rate of return sufficient to 
compensate profit-oriented enterprises and to attract new 
capital to the industry. 

The SAM program contains a separate tax records file 
for each country and state and includes all the relevant tax 
parameters under which a mining firm would operate. 
These tax parameters are applied to each evaluated mine 
with the assumption that each operation represents a 
separate corporate entity. The SAM system also contains 
a separate file of 12 economic indexes for each country to 



Table 1 .—Byproduct commodity prices used in economic 
evaluations 

(January 1984 dollars) 

Mica per mt.. 32.00 

Pollucite cone (25 pet Cs0 2 ) per mt.. 75.00 

Sandspar per mt.. 30.15 

Tantalum oxide per lb.. 29.00 

Tin per lb.. 5.70 



enable updating of cost estimates for both producing and 
nonproducing mines and undeveloped deposits in 95 
countries. 

Price tables are maintained for all coproducts and 
byproducts that are applicable to the availability analyses. 
The byproduct prices used in this study are shown in table 1. 

Detailed cash-flow analyses are generated with the SAM 
system for each preproduction and production year of an 
operation beginning with the initial year of analysis in 
1984. Individual deposit or region analyses were aggregated 
to produce a total availability curve. 

Availability curves are constructed as aggregations of 
all evaluated operations ordered from those having the 
lowest average total costs to those having the highest. The 
potential availability of lithium can be seen by comparing 
an expected long-run constant-dollar market price to the 
average total cost values shown on the availability curves. 



Availability curves are explained in greater detail in the 
Lithium Availability section. 

Certain assumptions are inherent to all analyses per- 
formed in this report: 

1. All mines produce at design capacity throughout the 
estimated life of the operations unless they were known to 
be producing at reduced levels, or were temporarily shut 
down because of depressed market conditions. It was assum- 
ed that full capacity could be resumed after a 1- to 4-yr 
preproduction period. 

2. Each operation is assumed to sell all of its output at 
no less than the determined total cost required to obtain 
at least the minimum specified rate of return. 

3. Each operation will be able to sell all its coproducts 
and byproducts at the January 1984 market prices. 

4. No startup date is known for the nonproducers, 
therefore, development was assumed to begin in year "N." 

5. Unless specific data were available, time delays 
relating to permitting, environmental impact statements, 
and other factors affecting actual or potential production 
were minimized. 

Some of the deposits evaluated could unexpectedly be 
prevented from development, forced to reduce production, 
or close owing to lack of capital, environmental problems 
of issues, political reasons, a poor economic climate, or other 
constraints not known at this time. 



BACKGROUND AND USES 



Lithium in pure form is a soft, silvery white metal that 
is the lightest of all solid elements. It is highly reactive as 
a pure element and has never been found as a metal in 
nature; instead it is always combined with stable com- 
pounds. The most concentrated forms of lithium are 
associated with pegmatites and salt brines. Lithium was 
discovered early in the 19th century but was not used un- 
til the latter half of the century. The first uses were as 
ceramic additives in the natural mineral form. The first im- 
portant use as a chemical was for hydrogen generation (as 
LiH), used to inflate emergency signal balloons in World 
War II. Later in the war, high-temperature-resistant 
lithium-based greases were developed. Shortly thereafter 
there was a demand for lithium in fusion reaction ex- 
perimentation. By 1960 lithium had come into demand for 
a wide variety of uses and was well established in the 
marketplace. Currently, lithium has broad industrial ap- 
plications; it is used in its mineral forms, such as spodumene 
and petalite, for use in ceramics and glass, in a variety of 
chemical forms, and as a metal for alloying. 

The ceramics industry uses an estimated 26 to 28 pet 
of the contained lithium consumed in the United States (6, 
p. 467). It is used in the form of mineral concentrate, such 
as spodumene or petalite, or as lithium carbonate (Li 2 C0 3 ) 
and other, forms derived through the carbonate process. 
Li 2 C0 3 is generally used in the steel enameling (glazing) 
process. The glazes are used for their resistance to thermal 
shock. It is also used directly or as petalite for making 
thermal-shock-resistant glass cookware. Controlled heat 
treatment of the lithium-enriched glass results in nearly 
zero thermal expansion. Low-iron spodumene may also be 
used in ceramics and in rigid foam insulation to impart low 
thermal expansion properties. Other ceramic and glass uses 
include lithium in sealed-beam headlights, photochromatic 
glass lenses, and large telescopic lenses. 



The commercial lithium compounds, including Li 2 C0 3 , 
lithium hydroxide monohydrate (LiOHH 2 0), and lithium 
chloride (LiCl), may be used directly themselves, for pro- 
ducing other chemicals, and for lithium metal. The car- 
bonate form is also used as a base for nearly all the chemical 
derivatives, including the hydroxide and chloride. 

The largest use of Li 2 C0 3 is in electrolytic aluminum 
reduction cells because it lowers the electrolytic cell 
temperature and thereby conserves energy in the process. 
In this use, lithium fluoride (LiF) comprises about 3 pet of 
the electrolyte. Research has recently developed a 
lightweight, high-strength lithium aluminum alloy that 
could increase the lithium metal consumption in the 
aerospace industry. 

The hydroxide is a component of over 50 pet of greases 
and accounts for about 15 pet of the lithium used in the 
United States (27, p. 7). These greases contain about 2 pet 
Li and are effective as lubricants over a wide range of 
temperatures. This chemical can also be used to make LiCl. 
The most important use of LiCl is as a feedstock for the pro- 
duction of lithium metal. The metal in turn is used for the 
production of butyllithium, which is used as a catalyst in 
the production of synthetic rubber. An estimated 10 pet of 
lithium minerals (spodumene, petalite, etc.) are used direct- 
ly in the ceramics and glass industry (7, p. 576). 

There are a number of minor uses of lithium in various 
chemical forms such as bromides, chromates, sulfates, 
manganates, and acetates. Lithium has a relatively impor- 
tant but quantitatively small application in battery 
technology, particularly in small batteries (watches, 
calculators, etc.), computers, and missile guidance systems. 
It also has some use in large industrial batteries but has 
not yet been developed for use in automotive batteries where 
the largest potential battery market exists. In addition, 
research has been ongoing for many years concerning 
lithium as a potential fuel source for fusion reactors. 



MARKET STRUCTURE 



In past years, nearly all (at least 90 pet) of the lithium 
in the MEC's has been produced in the United States. As 
of 1984, however, Chile entered into the market by develop- 
ing the Salar de Atacama operation. With the annual 
capacity of this new operation of about 6,000 mt Li 2 C0 3 (12 
to 14 million lb), the United States will retain about 75 to 
80 pet of the market share. A relatively small facility in 
Australia (Greenbushes) currently produces high-grade 
spodumene concentrate for the ceramics and glass industry. 
The production from this mine started in 1982, and the 
spodumene concentrate is exported to Europe and Japan 
for applications inceramics.TheBikitamine in Zimbabwe pro- 
duces mainly petalite for use in specialty glasses and 
ceramics. There are also some countries that produce small 
amounts of lithium minerals, mainly for internal 
consumption. 

The supply of lithium chemicals and many lithium- 
based products has been controlled by two U.S. -based com- 
panies. These are Lithium Corporation of America (Lithco), 
a subsidiary of FMC Corp., and Foote Mineral Co., con- 
trolled by Newmont Mining Corp. The Chilean Government 
entered into the supply side by its 45 pet ownership of the 
Salar de Atacama operation through the government's 
development company, Corporation de Fomento de la Pro- 
duccion (CORFO). The remaining 55 pet of this operation 
is owned by Foote Mineral Co. 

The market structure of lithium is relatively stable in 
view of the longstanding supply situation of the two com- 
panies. Lithco produces numerous products at its Bessemer 
City, NC, plant complex and at its subsidiary in the United 
Kingdom, Lithco Europe Ltd. Foote Minerals produces 
mainly Li 2 C0 3 at its Kings Mountain, NC, plant (a few 
kilometers from the Lithco operation) and its brine opera- 
tions in Nevada and Chile. Foote Minerals' concentrates 



and Li 2 C0 3 are supplied to company-owned plants in Penn- 
sylvania, Tennessee, and Virginia to produce other 
downstream (value-added) products. Both companies sup- 
ply raw materials to European plants for the production of 
products for the European market. The principal producer 
in Europe (other than Lithco Europe) is Chemettall, a sub- 
sidiary of Metallgesellschaft, Federal Republic of Germany. 

The U.S. trade balance of lithium weighs heavily in the 
favor of exports. In 1983 the United States exported lithium 
products valued at over $42 million, while the value of im- 
ports totaled about $2 million. In terms of total weight of 
lithium products, the United States exported about 12,600 
mt and imported about 180 mt (7, p. 578). 

This study includes three types of lithium commodities: 
Li 2 C0 3 , spodumene, and petalite concentrates. The pricing 
structure depends largely on the type and purity of the con- 
centrate. Current prices are adapted from published sources 
(13) and are discussed below. 

Li 2 C0 3 , which contains nearly 19 pet Li, is produced 
from spodumene at Kings Mountain and Bessemer City, 
NC, and from brines at Salar de Atacama, Chile, and Silver 
Peak, NV. It currently sells for about $1.54/lb delivered 
(May 1985). Spodumene concentrate can contain from about 
1.86 to 3.25 pet Li and is priced from about $200/mt to 
$356/mt f.o.b. mine in the United States and c.i.f. in other 
countries, depending on the grade, purity, and volume. 
Petalite concentrate is produced at the Bikita, Zimbabwe, 
mine and sells for about $185/mt c.i.f. European ports. This 
concentrate contains approximately 1.86 pet Li and is used 
in specialty glass and ceramics. 

Other mineral concentrates include lepidolite, 
amblygonite, and eucryptite; however, quantities used are 
so small that they have no separate pricing quotations. 



PRODUCTION 



Lithium production for the years 1980-84 is listed in 
table 2. The U.S. production amounted to about 69 pet of 
the total world lithium production in 1983. In that year, 
the United States produced over 90 pet of MEC production. 
This share decreased in 1984 and will decrease even more 
in 1985, with the first year of full production from Salar 
de Atacama in Chile. 

The quantities of contained lithium were calculated 
from estimated percentages contained in the various 
mineral concentrates (i.e., spodumene, petalite, lepidolite, 
amblygonite, etc.) produced in each country. The non-U. S. 
production is used mostly as mineral concentrates, whereas 
the U.S. production is mostly in the form of Li 2 C0 3 and other 
chemicals. 



Table 2. — World lithium production, 1980-84' (29) 

(Metric tons of contained lithium) 

Country 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 e 

Argentina 9 2 2 5 1 

Australia 62 212 

Brazil 54 60 60 54 10 

Chile 481 

China 362 272 279 317 454 

Namibia NA 34 27 18 14 

Portugal 17 18 16 9 4 

United States 2 4,920 4,922 3,469 4,453 4,444 

U.S.S.R 1,180 1,088 1,088 1,270 1,633 

Zimbabwe 398 417 290 136 159 

Total 6,940 6,813 5,231 6,324 7,412 

U.S. production, as pet of total. . . 71 72 66 70 60 

e Estimated. NA Not available. 

1 Contained lithium estimated from data on mineral concentrate 
production. 

2 Based on 10-K information. 



GEOLOGY 



The principal occurrences of lithium are in pegmatites 
and salt brines. Pegmatites generally occur in Precambrian 
metamorphosed shield-type rocks, and the brines occur in 
closed drainage basins in areas of low precipitation and high 
evaporation. 



PEGMATITES 

The pegmatite occurrences are relatively widespread 
throughout the world in shield-type rocks. Generally, the 
geological environment for the formation of the spodumene 



pegmatites also produces swarms of pegmatites that may 
consist of hundreds of small pegmatites. This study ad- 
dresses only the larger, potentially more economically 
viable occurrences within an area. 

Lithium pegmatites have been classified into two 
categories: (23): (1) deposits that contain a relatively con- 
sistent spodumene content throughout the pegmatite and 
from contact to contact (no zonation) and (2) deposits con- 
taining spodumene and other lithium minerals, such as 
petalite and lepidolite, in a zoned deposit. The first type is 
by far more important quantitatively and, where mined, 
the spodumene may consist of up to 25 pet of the rock. The 
pegmatites generally contain a greater quantity of quartz 
than spodumene, with the remainder of the pegmatites be- 
ing made up of feldspars and micas. Zoned pegmatites 
generally contain other economically important minerals. 
The largest known zoned pegmatite is the Bikita pegmatite 
in Zimbabwe, which contains petalite, spodumene, 
lepidolite, eucryptite, and amblygonite. The principal 
lithium pegmatite minerals are listed in table 3. 



Table 3. — Principal lithium pegmatite minerals (23) 



Lithium content, pet 



Mineral 



Formula 



Theoretical 
maximum 



Marketed 
concentrates 



Amblygonite LiAIP0 4 (F,OH) 4.73 3.7-4.2 

Eucryptite LiAISi0 4 5.50 2.6-3.0 

Lepidolite KLi 2 AISi 4 O 10 F 2 Variable 1 .4-1 .9 

Petalite LiAISi 4 O 10 2.26 1 .4-2.2 

Spodumene LiAISi 2 6 3.73 2.6-3.0 



Table 4. — Estimated average element content of 
some brines, percent (16, 26) 

Location Li Mg K Na 

Bolivia: Salar de Uyuni 0.025 0.54 0.62 9.10 

Chile: Salar de Atacama 125 .91 1.87 6.92 

Israel-Jordan: Dead Sea 002 4.00 .60 3.00 

United States: 

Great Salt Lake, UT 006 .80 .40 7.00 

Salton Sea, CA 022 .028 1.42 5.71 

Searles Lake, CA 0083 .034 2.30 15.20 

Silver Peak, NV 03 .040 .80 6.20 



CLAYS 

A relatively large, low-grade, lithium-bearing clay 
resource occurs in northern Nevada and southeastern 
Oregon; the lithium is contained in hectorite. The clay has 
only been bench tested for lithium extraction (19) and, since 
there is no reliable grade information on which to base a 
total demonstrated resource estimate, the deposit was not 
evaluated in this study. 



BRINES 

Most of the lithium originates from playa brines con- 
taining lithium in varying amounts. At Silver Peak, NV, 
and Salar de Atacama, Chile, lithium is being extracted as 
the primary commodity. Lithium could potentially be ex- 
tracted as a byproduct from other brine operations, prin- 
cipally magnesium and potash at Searles Lake, CA, the 
Great Salt Lake, UT, and the Dead Sea (Israel and Jordan). 

The playas ("salares" in Latin America) occur in closed 
or restricted drainage basins where the evaporation rate 
is greater than the precipitation. The water source for the 



playas can be either direct precipitation or runoff from the 
surrounding hills, migration through the water table or 
mineral rich springs; several sources could contribute to the 
development of a deposit. 

The mineral content of a deposit is dependent on the 
source material; the largest evaporite content is salt (NaCl). 
A playa is normally composed of a salt crust that is in- 
terspersed with varying amounts of sands, clays, and other 
detritus. This salt crust is normally porous (more so near 
the surface) and the interstices contain the salt brines. 
Selected elemental content of some brines are as listed in 
table 4. 

An important factor in the recovery of lithium is the 
magnesium-lithium (Mg-Li) ratio. The higher the ratio the 
more difficult the extraction, since more quantities of lime 
must be used, resulting in larger facilities for both 
magnesium separation and the necessity to settle out the 
calcium ions introduced by the lime. 

A small amount of lithium was produced from the 
Searles Lake playa for a short time in the late 1970's, and 
processes have been investigated for the extraction of 
lithium from the Dead Sea, the Great Salt Lake, the Salton 
Sea, and seawater. 



RESOURCES 



Lithium resources evaluated in this study are defined 
according to the mineral resource-reserve classification 
developed jointly by the Bureau of Mines and the U.S. 
Geological Survey (30). This classification is shown 
diagramatically in figure 1. 

Total demonstrated resources evaluated amount to a lit- 
tle over 3.1 million mt contained lithium, with a little over 
2 million mt Li recoverable. Individual deposit data (quan- 
tities, grades, ownership, and operational data) are listed 
in tables 5 and 6. The locations of the deposits are shown 
in figure 2. 

Demonstrated resources shown in table 5 include 
measured plus indicated quantities; the identified quan- 
tities shown include measured plus indicated plus inferred 
resources. Evaluations are based on the demonstrated 
resources. 



All the resources evaluated in this study are from 
published sources. In some cases, the quantities evaluated 
as demonstrated resources are the author's interpretation 
of more than one published estimate. A total of 23 mines 
and deposits were studied, but only 16 were included in the 
final evaluation. Five deposits were excluded because they 
contained very small resources (total of less than 250,000 
mt ore): La Viquita and Santa Gertrudis, Argentina; Giant 
Volney and Mateen (SD), United States; and Mdara-Nigel, 
Zimbabwe. Two others, Leguna Colorado, Bolivia, and 
North Atacama, Chile, were not evaluated owing to a lack 
of demonstrated resource and cost data. 

The relationship between demonstrated and inferred 
resources in terms of contained in situ lithium are shown 
in the two diagrams of figure 3. 

As can be seen, the inferred resources of the brines con- 



Cumulative 
production 



IDENTIFIED RESOURCES 



Demonstrated 



Measured Indicated 



Inferred 



UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES 



Probability range 



Hypothetical 



(or)- 



Speculative 



ECONOMIC 



MARGINALLY 
ECONOMIC 



SUB- 
ECONOMIC 



Reserve 



base 



Inferred 



reserve 



base 



+ 



+ 



Other 
occurrences 



Includes nonconventional and low-grade materials 



Figure 1 .—Mineral resource classification categories (30). 



Table 5. — MEC lithium resources 



Country 
and property 



Demonstrated 

in situ material, 

10 6 mt 



Grade, 
pet Li 



Lithium resources, 10 3 mt Li 



Demonstrated 



Contained Recoverable 



Identified: 
Contained 1 



PEGMATITES 

Australia: Greenbushes 

Canada: 

Bernic Lake 

Buck-Coe-Pegli 

Georgia Lake 

Jean Lake 

Lac la Croix 

Nama Creek 

Quebec Lithium 

Yellowknife 

Total or wtd av, Canada 

United States: 

Bessemer City 

Kings Mountain 

Total or wtd av, United States 

Zaire: Kitotolo 

Zimbabwe: Bikita 

Total or wtd av, pegmatites 

BRINES 

Bolivia: Salar de Uyuni 

Chile: Salar de Atacama 

United States: Silver Peak 

Total or wtd av, brines 

Grand total or wtd av 

1 Includes demonstrated and inferred tonnage. 

NOTE— Data may not add to totals in text because of rounding. 



33.50 



6.65 

.80 

3.20 

1.50 

1.40 

5.55 

14.50 

49.11 



505.00 

1,300.00 

240.00 



2,045.00 



2,242.51 



1.16 



389 



1.28 
.99 
.59 
.60 
.59 
.48 
.60 
.65 



85 
8 

19 
9 
8 

27 

88 
319 



.025 
.125 
.033 



126 

1,625 

72 



.089 



1,823 



.154 3,445 



248 



50 

4 

11 

6 

5 

16 

59 

91 



101 

1,300 

65 



1,466 



2,214 



389 



85 

8 

19 

9 

8 

27 

120 

320 



82.71 


.68 


563 


242 


596 


23.30 
22.70 


.68 

.68 


158 
154 


109 
120 


158 
173 


46.00 


.68 


312 


229 


331 


31.50 
3.80 


.98 

1.35 


307 
51 


12 
17 


495 
151 


197.51 


.82 


1,622 


748 


1.962 



5,500 

4,300 

124 



9,924 



11.886 



Table 6. — MEC lithium mine and deposit data 



Country and property 



Ownership 



Estimated or proposed 
Status 1 Type 2 production capacity 

mt/yr 3 



Product 



PEGMATITES 



Australia: Greenbushes. 
Canada: 

Bernic Lake 

Buck-Coe-Pegli 

Georgia Lake 

Jean Lake 

Lac la Croix 

Nama Creek 

Quebec Lithium 

Yellowknife 

United States: 

Bessemer City 

Kings Mountain 

Zaire: Kitotolo 

Zimbabwe: Bikita 



Greenbushes Tin Ltd. 



Tanco Mining Group 

Lithium Corp. of Canada 

Various owners 

Unclaimed land 

...Do 

Cominco Ltd 

Sullivan Mining Group Ltd 

Canadian Superior Exploration Ltd. 

Lithium Corp. of America (Lithco) 

Foote Mineral Co 

Geomines and Zaire Government. . 
Bikita Minerals (Pvt.) Ltd 



P 


OP 


24,800 


Spodumene. 


D 


UG 


54,000 


Do. 


E 


UG 


30,000 


Do. 


E 


UG 


22,200 


Do. 


E 


UG 


21,700 


Do. 


E 


UG 


21,100 


Do. 


E 


UG 


34,800 


Do. 


Pp 


UG 


49,000 


Do. 


E 


OP 


45,300 


Do. 


P 


OP 


16,300 


Li 2 C0 3 . 


P 


OP 


7,260 


Do. 


E 


OP 


39,500 


Spodumene. 


P 


OP 


38,500 


Petalite, 
spodumene, 
lepidolite, 
amblygonite 



BRINES 



Bolivia: Salar de Uyuni 
Chile: Salar de Atacama. . . 
United States: Silver Peak. 



Government 

Foote Mineral Co. and CORFO. 
Foote Mineral Co 



6,350 
6,350 
6,350 



Li 2 C0 3 . 
Do. 
Do. 



1 P = producing, D = under development, E = explored, Pp = past producer. 

2 OP = open pit, UG = underground, B = brine. 

3 In terms of product produced; proposed capacity for nonproducers. 




Figure 2.— Lithium mine and deposit locations. 




Total pegmatites and brines, identified 
1 1,885,000 mt 

Figure 3.— Comparison of demonstrated and inferred lithium 
resources contained in pegmatites and brines. 




Total = 2,214,000 mt 

Figure 4.— Percentage share of total recoverable lithium 
equivalents by mine status and country. 



Petalite 
I pet 




Petalite 
pet 



Demonstrated contained 
3,455,000 mt 




Demonstrated recoverable 
2, 214,000 mt 



Figure 5. — Distribution of recoverable lithium equivalents within ore types. 



stitute a much higher percentage of the total than do the 
pegmatites. This is because only a limited amount of ex- 
ploration data is necessary to extrapolate large resources 
in play as. This is not the case in hardrock deposits. 

Overall recoveries (including mine, mill, and carbonate 
plant) for all pegmatite deposits is estimated at 47 pet. This 
value is somewhat distorted because of the Kititolo deposit, 
which has a very low mill recovery. This is because only 
a small part of the spodumene ore could be recovered as a 
byproduct of tin and tantalum production. If this deposit 
were not included, the recovery would be nearly 60 pet. 
Overall recovery is estimated at about 70 pet for the pro- 
ducing pegmatite mines and at about 30 pet for the non- 
producing deposits (including the Kititolo deposit). 

Lithium recoveries of brines are assumed at 80 pet for 
Salar de Atacama and Salar de Uyuni. Recovery is assum- 
ed at 90 pet for Silver Peak, since it has been producing 



for many years and is likely to have developed a higher 
degree of efficiency. The recoverable brine resources shown 
in table 5 are assumed to be recoverable product. 

The recoverable demonstrated resources by country and 
with respect to producing mines and undeveloped proper- 
ties is shown in the three diagrams in figure 4. As of the 
date of the study, the Bernic Lake deposit was on pilot plant 
status, so it is included as a nonproducer. 

A comparison of recoverable lithium from this type of 
ore is shown in the two diagrams of figure 5. The brines 
are a dominant source, much more so in the producing 
mines. Data on the producing mines are more indicative 
of the actual long-term situation, since with the exception 
of the Bernic Lake operation, there is little likelihood that 
the nonproducing deposits will be developed in the 
foreseeable future. 



OPERATION SUMMARIES 



PEGMATITES 
Australia 

The Greenbushes mining complex is located in Western 
Australia about 200 km south of Perth and 70 km southwest 
of the Port of Bunbury. (See figure 2.) The area has been 
producing tin and tantalum from placer deposits and 
weathered pegmatites for about 100 yr. The current tin- 
tantalum operation started up in 1964 and was modified 
to its present state in 1978. Exploration on the adjacent 



spodumene pegmatites began in 1980 when exploration for 
tin orebodies discovered the spodumene zone; production 
of spodumene concentrates started in 1982. 

The Greenbushes tin field and spodumene pegmatites 
lie in a north-south striking belt of metasedimentary and 
metavolcanic rocks. The metasedimentary belt extends over 
an extensive area that is generally bounded on the west 
by sediments and on the east by granites. The belt contains 
a number of rock types, such as granofels, gneiss, am- 
phibolite, schist, and various dikes and stocks. The 
pegmatites which contain tin, tantalum, and spodumene 
extend in a northerly direction for about 5 km. 



10 



The ore contains much higher grade and higher purity 
lithium material than is normally present in pegmatites. 
Demonstrated resources (measured plus indicated) have 
been estimated at 33.5 million mt grading 2.5 pet Li 2 (1.16 
pet Li) (9). Since these resources were developed on limited 
drilling, it is quite possible that they could be increased by 
future exploration. 

In 1982 the company operated a pilot plant that pro- 
duced a small amount of concentrates, which were tested 
by potential customers. In 1983, the operation began on a 
commercial scale; the annual output capacity is projected 
to about 25,000 mt of spodumene concentrate. The lithium 
ore also contains tin and tantalum, which are produced as 
byproducts. There are plans to double the plant capacity 
if demand improves sufficiently. The possibility of building 
a Li 2 C0 3 plant is being investigated. 

Mining is by open pit, and benefication consists of 
recovery of the tin and tantalum by gravity methods follow- 
ed by flotation to recover the spodumene. The spodumene 
concentrate is further upgraded by desliming along with 
magnetic separation to remove iron. 



Canada 

Canada has a number of lithium pegmatite deposits 
located primarily in metamorphosed Canadian Shield rocks 
at various locations from Quebec to Yellowknife in the Nor- 
thwest Territories. There was production from the Quebec 
Lithium deposits between 1955-65, but none of the other 
pegmatites are known to have been mined. The feasibility 
of producing spodumene from the high-grade Bernic Lake 
deposit in Manitoba is currently being pilot-plant tested. 
The Yellowknife deposits contain the largest demonstrated 
Canadian lithium resource, but they are comparatively low 
grade and extremely remote. A discussion of individual 
deposits follows. 

Bernic Lake Area 

The Bernic Lake area consists of two lithium deposits 
a few kilometers apart; these are the Bernic Lake Mine and 
the small Buck-Coe-Pegli prospect to the east. The area is 
located in southeast Manitoba near the Ontario border. (See 
figure 2.) 

Bernic Lake 



The Bernic Lake Mine is managed by the Tantalum 
Mining Corp. (TANCO), which is a consortium formed by 
Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Co. Ltd., Kawecki 
Berylco Industries, and Manitoba Development Corp. (a 
Government enterprise). The mine had been a principal 
world producer of tantalum concentrates; however, it was 
placed on standby December 31, 1982, because of the 
depressed tantalum market. The tantalum deposit also con- 
tains a separate spodumene zone of significant size that has 
not yet been exploited. The lithium content of the 
spodumene, at 2.7 pet Li 2 (1.25 pet Li), is considered very 
high grade with respect to other world spodumene resources. 

The area was originally explored as a tin-tantalum 
deposit in 1928. Additional exploration discovered resources 
of tantalum, lithium, cesium, and beryl. Extensive tantalum 
exploration was initiated in 1967 with production begin- 
ning in 1969. 



Table 7. — Bernic Lake deposit resources (2, p. 149) 

Commodity Quantity, mt Grade, pet 

Beryllium 834,440 0.20 BeO 

Cesium 317,450 23.30 Cs 2 

Lithium: 

Lepidolite 97,684 2.24 Li 2 

Spodumene 6,662,674 2.76 Li 2 

Tantalum 1 ,878,722 0.22 Ta 2 O s 

The Bernic Lake pegmatite is extremely complex and 
contains a wide assemblage of minerals. Nearly 70 minerals 
have been identified including 7 tantalum and 4 lithium 
minerals, beryl, and pollucite (a cesium mineral) (2, p. 147). 
The deposit occurs in the Archean Bird River Greenstone 
Belt, which is a highly metamorphosed series of sedimen- 
tary volcanic, and plutonic rocks. The complex structural 
nature and mineralogical association of the rocks has led 
to many detailed studies on the geological aspects of the 
area. 

The pegmatite is a relatively flat-lying tabular body dip- 
ping to the north at up to 20°. The thickness ranges from 
15-20 m up to 80-90 m, and the dimensions are at least 450 
m down dip and 1,200 m along the strike. Most of the struc- 
ture lies under Bernic Lake. 

Within the pegmatite, nine mineralogic zones have been 
identified containing resources of tantalum, lithium, 
cesium, and beryl. The various resources are physically 
separate and could be mined separately. Resources of the 
various commodities are shown in table 7. 

Mining for lithium began in the latter part of 1984 on 
a small scale. A part of the current gravity mill, once used 
for tantalum, was adapted to heavy media and flotation for 
spodumene and operated at a rate of about 100 to 150 mt/d. 
Expansion of the mill is expected to increase capacity to 
about 700 mt/d to 800 mt/d by late 1986. 

The ore has been tested by the flotation process, and 
results have indicated that the ore could produce a concen- 
trate as high as 7.2 pet Li 2 with a 90-pct mill recovery. 
The low iron content would make the concentrate advan- 
tageous for ceramics use (2, p. 157). 

The concentrates could be used in either ceramics or 
glass or as feed to a Li 2 C0 3 plant. The resources could sup- 
port a 200,000 mt/yr (ore) operation for about 40 to 50 yr. 

Buck-Coe-Pegli 

The Buck-Coe-Pegli prospect is located about 5 km east 
of the Bernic Lake Mine and lies in a similar regional 
geologic setting. The mineralized area was discovered 
around 1920 and through the years has experienced periods 
of exploration, particularly when the lithium market was 
favorable, as in 1955. The property has had a number of 
owners; the longest period of ownership was by Lithium Cor- 
poration of Canada. 

The deposit is composed of a series of subhorizontal dikes 
cropping out on the Buck, Coe, and Pegli claims. The dip 
is generally to the west at about 10°. The surface exposures 
have very limited extent; however, a lower zone was out- 
lined by drilling and is estimated to contain about 800,000 
mt of 2.13-pct-Li 2 (0.99-pct-Li) material (32). 

The deposit would require access by shaft or shaft- 
decline to a depth of 180 to 200 m, and mining would pro- 
bably be by room-and-pillar methods. Beneficiation would 
be an economic drawback in the development of the pro- 
perty. Even at a 400-mt/d capacity, the life of the operation 
would only be about 8 yr, which would not justify the ex- 
pense of constructing a new flotation mill. Thus, for the pur- 



11 



pose of this evaluation, it is assumed that the proposed mill 
for the TANCO operation could accommodate the ore from 
this mine. It is also assumed that the concentrates could 
be marketed similarly to those of the TANCO operation. 

Lac la Croix 

The Lac la Croix lithium pegmatites are located on the 
east end of Lac la Croix within the boundaries of Quetico 
Provincial Park in southwest Ontario. (See figure 2.) The 
deposit was discovered in the early 1950's and was explored 
by a series of trenches and diamond drill holes in 1956 and 
1957. At that time the deposit was owned by International 
Lithium Corp. 

The mineralized area consists of outcrops of spodumene- 
bearing pegmatites. The pegmatites are generally in 
easterly -trending Archean metasediments and dip steeply 
to the north. The mineralization is generally coarse with 
spodumene crystals ranging to over 30 cm in length. The 
spodumene is randomly oriented and comprises about 25 
pet of the pegmatite (25). 

Resources have been estimated at 1.1 million mt (25) 
and 1.5 million mt (2, p. 66) of material grading 1.3 and 
1.2 pet Li 2 (0.60 and 0.56 pet Li), respectively. For the pur- 
pose of this evaluation, 1.4 million mt of 1.27-pct-Li 2 
(0.59-pct-Li) material is estimated to be present. 

If the deposit were mined, it would have to be by 
underground methods, since the nearness of the pegmatites 
to the shores of the lake would preclude open pit mining. 

It is doubtful, however, that this deposit would be ex- 
ploited except in the case of an emergency, because it is 
within park boundaries. In fact, claim ownership has 
reverted to the Government. Even if the property were open 
for development, the low grade and resource quantity would 
undoubtedly preclude profitable mining in the foreseeable 
future. 



Lake Nipigon Region 

The region north of Lake Nipigon contains a number 
of spodumene-bearing pegmatite exposures over an area of 
roughly 1,200 km 2 . Most of these pegmatites are small and 
inconsistent in grade; however, three locations within the 
area have been explored for the possibility of spodumene 
production and are included in this study: Georgia Lake, 
Jean Lake, and Nama Creek. Each of these properties were 
evaluated separately. The area is located about 60 km north 
of Nipigon (on Lake Superior) or about 160 km northeast 
of Thunder Bay; the location is shown in figure 2. With 
respect to most other evaluated deposits, these exposures 
are somewhat small and relatively low grade. The low grade 
and small size of the resources (similar to Lac la Croix) make 
it unlikely that any of these deposits would be mined in the 
foreseeable future. 

Georgia Lake 

The Georgia Lake pegmatite deposits are the southern- 
most deposits in the area and include three exposures that 
are owned by various individuals or companies. Property 
ownership has changed through the years, and some of the 
claims have lapsed. Most of the exploration work has done 
in the middle to late 1950's. 

The pegmatites are geologically similar to occurrences 
elsewhere in Canada. Thickness can vary from about 3 m 



to 20 m, and depth, as determined from drilling data, is 160 
m. The total resources for the three exposures have been 
reported at about 3.2 million mt with a grade of 1.27 pet 
Li 2 (0.59 pet Li) (25). A mining operation of 500 mt/d would 
probably be proposed for this area. 



Jean Lake 

The Jean Lake deposits are located 8 to 10 km north 
of the Georgia Lake area and are currently owned by the 
Crown as unclaimed land. The area consists of numerous 
pegmatites similar to those in the Georgia Lake area. 
Only one pegmatite, known as the "Parole Lake 
Pegmatite," has been explored in this area. The pegmatite 
has been drilled to a depth of over 330 m and is reported 
to contain about 1.5 million mt of material with a grade 
of 1.3 pet Li 2 0. Mining and beneficiation would be the 
similar to that at Georgia Lake; that is, a 500-mt/d room- 
and-pillar mine supplying a similarly sized flotation mill. 

Nama Creek 

The Nama Creek area is located about 20 km northeast 
of the Georgia Lake-Jean Lake deposits. It consists of a 
pegmatite zone of about 2 by 4 km. There are numerous 
pegmatites cropping out in the area, but most of them are 
quite small and have no development potential. The largest 
of the exposures includes the Nama Creek North and South 
and the Conway, about 3 km to the east. The deposits were 
staked in 1955, and ownership has changed several times. 
The Nama Creek North and South deposits are owned by 
York Consolidated Exploration Ltd., and the Conway area 
is presently controlled by Cominco Ltd. 

The area was explored during 1955-58 when the lithium 
market was expanding. Exploration on the Nama Creek 
deposits included trenching and drilling and the sinking 
of about a 150 -m shaft. The Conway deposit was drilled bet- 
ween 1956 and 1958. 

The Nama Creek deposits are underlain by thickly bedd- 
ed, metasedimentary quartz biotite gneisses. Several 
diabase dikes cut both metasediments and pegmatites. The 
Nama Creek North deposit consists of two enechelon 
pegmatites about 400 to 600 m in length. The Nama Creek 
South deposit is essentially a single pegmatite about 250 
m in length. The Conway pegmatite is a little over 400 m 
in length. The width of pegmatites ranges between 3 and 
13 m, and the depth has been tested to 300 m. The general 
dip is 70° to 75° to the northwest. Resources have been 
reported as 5,553,000 mt averaging 1.03 pet Li 2 (0.47 pet 
Li) (22, p. 50). 

In the event that these deposits should be exploited, min- 
ing would be underground because of the narrow, steeply 
dipping veins. For the purpose of this report, it is assumed 
that a 1,000-mt/d flotation mill would be built to serve the 
three Nama Creek deposits. The mining would be coor- 
dinated to supply consistent feed to the mill for a period 
of 20 to 25 yr. 



Quebec Lithium 

The Quebec Lithium property is located in the Preissac- 
Lacorne District about 40 km north of Val d'Or, PQ. (See 
figure 2.) It is currently owned by Sullivan Mining Group 
Ltd. 



12 



The property was developed in 1954 and went into pro- 
duction in 1955 to supply spodumene concentrate to the 
Lithco carbonate plant in North Carolina for production of 
Li 2 C0 3 and LiOH.nH 2 0. The major consumer at the time 
was the U.S. Government, which instituted the lithium 
stockpile buying program in 1955-60. Production ceased in 
1959 when the stockpile was near its objective. Production 
resumed in 1960 at a reduced rate when a Li 2 C0 3 chemical 
plant was constructed on the property to produce Li 2 C0 3 
by direct precipitation with sodium carbonate (Na-jCC-^. The 
plant operated until 1965 and was apparently not com- 
petitive with the established sulfuric acid (H 2 S0 4 ) process. 
Research was continued by the Quebec Government, and 
some process improvements were later reported (24). 

The property consists of a group of spodumene-bearing 
pegmatite dikes that cut an amphibolized greenstone. The 
dikes strike generally north of west and dip to the south 
at about 50 °-70 °. The dikes lie within a zone that is about 
600 m wide by 2,400 m long (14). 

Resources for the property have been estimated at about 
20 million mt at 1.3 pet Li 2 (0.60 pet Li) (11). It is estimated 
that the demonstrated resources would be in the order of 
14 to 15 million mt. This corresponds to the quantity 
estimated as a result of diamond drilling (22, p. 77); 
however, many dikes in the area have not been explored, 
so that there is potential for additional resources. 

Prior to shutdown, the mine-mill capacity was rated at 
about 900 mt/d. The mine was accessed by a five- 
compartment shaft and developed on three levels. At the 
time of closure, the mine was employing shrinkage stope 
methods; however, preparations were being made to mine 
by long-hole stoping. This would probably be the method 
used if the mine were to reopen. Beneficiation was flota- 
tion; in the period 1955-60, concentrates contained between 
5.5 and 5.9 pet Li 2 (2.55 and 2.74 pet Li). 



Yellowknife Area 

The Yellowknife pegmatites are located east of the city 
of Yellowknife in the Northwest Territories. (See figure 2.) 
Although there is ample infrastructure developed in the 
Yellowknife area to support development of a lithium opera- 
tion, the deposits are extremely remote with respect to 
markets. The distance to Edmonton, AB, is about 1,600 km; 
this includes about 1,300 km by rail to Hay River and about 
300 km to Yellowknife by road. There is also access by boat 
on the Great Slave Lake from Hay River (165 km) during 
the period June 15 to October 15. Most of the pegmatites 
are owned by Canadian Superior Ltd. 

From Yellowknife, the westernmost deposits are accessi- 
ble by approximately 50 km of existing gravel road. Access 
to the more distant eastern cluster of deposits would require 
the construction of about 75 km of new road. 

During 1974-76 Canadian Superior conducted an ex- 
ploration program in the area. There are hundreds of out- 
cropping pegmatites in the region; however, most of these 
are very small. Canadian Superior initially screened over 
30 of the larger exposures, and it was found that 14 met 
criteria that could lead to possible mining. Results of the 
exploration are summarized by Lasmanis (18), and the com- 
bined resources (assumed as demonstrated) of the 
pegmatites are shown in table 8. 

The resource estimates on the individual pegmatites are 
based on a continuous depth of 150 m. This depth was con- 
firmed by drilling several of the larger pegmatites (18, p. 
406). 



Table 8. — Demonstrated lithium pegmatite resources in the 
Yellowknife area (18, p. 408) 

_ ... Resources, Grade, Contained 

Pegmatite mt pet Li Li, mt 

Western deposits: 

Fi 15,320,500 0.55 84,262 

Big 7,888,000 .68 53,688 

Jim 4,205,000 .58 24,389 

Vo 3,370,500 .69 23,256 

Ann 3,335,600 .89 29,686 

Ki 2,812,000 .65 18,278 

Nite 2,580,500 .70 18,064 

Total or average 39,512,100 .64 251,623 

Eastern deposits: 

Thor 9,205,000 .70 64,435 

Lens 102,600 .92 944 

Bin 99,100 .81 802 

Mac 72,600 .93 675 

Hid 50,400 .79 398 

Bet 42,700 .93 397 

Nut 24,600 1 .02 251 

Total or average 9,597,000 .71 67,902 



Grand total or average. 



49,109,100 



.66 



319,525 



Evaluated resources for the area are estimated at 40 
pet of the total demonstrated resource value shown in the 
table, or about 19.6 million mt of material with an average 
grade of 1.42 pet Li 2 (0.66 pet Li). This tonnage value ap- 
proximates the quantity that would be available by open 
pit mining methods to a maximum depth of 60 m. 

All of the tested pegmatites are considered to be un- 
zoned; that is, they would contain a consistent spodumene 
grade from wall to wall. The largest pegmatites are in the 
western cluster of deposits, but the smaller deposits in the 
east have a higher grade and occur in units easily minable 
by open pit. 

Mining would probably begin with the western cluster 
of deposits, since this area has an access road. Annual ore 
capacity is projected at 250,000 mt. Estimated stripping 
ratio for mining to a depth of 60 m is 2.5. 

The ore would be hauled to a mill site centrally located 
to all the western deposits, or about 20 to 25 km from 
Yellowknife. Concentration would be by flotation. Flotation 
tests have been conducted on some of the ore, yielding a 
6-pct-Li 2 (2.79-pct-Li) concentrate with 80-pct recovery (18, 
p. 406). 

For the purpose of this study it is assumed the concen- 
trates would be hauled by truck (or barge in the ice-free open 
months) to Hay River and then transported by rail about 
2,400 km to Prince Rupert, BC, for use in ceramics or for 
export for the production of lithium-based chemicals. 
Another option would be to construct a Li 2 C0 3 plant in the 
area. However, in view of ample supplies of lithium near 
the market areas, plus the high cost of energy and materials 
in the Yellowknife area, such a scenario was not considered 
in this analysis. 

To justify development of the lithium deposits in this 
area would require a large increase in demand that could 
not be met by the other currently mined resources or more 
economically undeveloped properties. At an estimated ore 
capacity of 250,000 mt/yr, the western deposits could pro- 
duce for over 60 yr. 

United States (North Carolina 
Tin-Spodumene Belt) 

The principal lithium pegmatite resources in the United 
States are located in North Carolina in what is known as 



13 



the North Carolina Tin-Spodumene Belt. Minor resources 
also occur in extreme western South Dakota. The South 
Dakota pegmatite deposits were the principal domestic 
lithium sources in the 1940's, but were abandoned with the 
development of the North Carolina pegmatites. (The South 
Dakota pegmatites have relatively insignificant resources 
and therefore were not included in the final evaluation.) 
The lithium pegmatites of North Carolina, in the 
southwest part of the State, are being mined at two loca- 
tions. Foote Mineral Co. operates a mine and chemical plant 
near Kings Mountain, and Lithco has a larger operation 
about 10 km to the northeast near Bessemer City. (See 
figure 2.) Both complexes have been in operation for many 
years — Foote Mineral since 1942 (with some interruptions) 
and Lithco since the mid-1950's. Since many aspects of the 
deposits are so similar, the following discussion is general- 
ized to include both operations. 

Geology 

The lithium pegmatite zone is located in the south- 
central Piedmont area of North Carolina. The Piedmont is 
underlain by a variety of igneous and metamorphic rocks, 
trending north to northeast. 

Attitude of the main structure ranges from nearly flat 
to vertical; most dips of the structure are to the northwest. 
In the deposit area, there is a series of weakly metamor- 
phosed rocks that crop out in long, narrow belts. Intrusive 
rocks in the area include those of granitic, dioritic, and gab- 
broic compositions. The spodumene belt occurs in a narrow 
zone in the Carolina gneiss within the metamorphic rocks. 
The gneiss is bounded on the northwest by the Cherryville 
quartz monzonite and on the southeast by metasediments. 

The spodumene zone is associated with various occur- 
rences of gneiss, schist, amphibolite, limestone, quartzite, 
and granite. The pegmatites occur in zones of weakness in 
the enclosing rocks. The most persistent pegmatites general- 
ly strike northeast, and most of them are parallel with the 
layering or schistosity of the major rock units. The shape 
of the pegmatite zone varies with the structure but is 
generally tabular, and the contacts with the enclosing rocks 
vary from sharp to gradational. 

Resources 

The North Carolina spodumene resources have been 
published throughout the years of production and are 
generally quite well known. According to the 1982 company 
10-K data, the resources of the Bessemer City holdings are 
estimated at about 25.7 million mt of material containing 
1.46 pet Li 2 (0.68 pet Li). Similarly, the Kings Mountain 
resources are stated at approximately 27 million mt at a 
grade of about 1.5 pet Li 2 (0.70 pet Li) (8, 10). These quan- 
tities represent a slight increase from the 1981 data used 
in this study. (See table 5.) This suggests that greater quan- 
tities of resources may exist on both holdings because of 
the large lateral extent of the pegmatite zones. 

Mining 

Mining on both operations is by very similar open pit 
methods; both ore and waste require blasting. Usually the 
companies have established a drilling practice involving 
presplitting the bench faces to reduce overbreakage and pro- 
vide a more stable pit face. The presplit holes are about 2 m 
apart and are not loaded. 



The operations generally utilize both hydraulic shovels 
and backhoes. The backhoes are used for more selective min- 
ing of the smaller pegmatites. Selective mining is impor- 
tant in the separation of the spodumene from amblygonite 
because the amblygonite is deleterious to the downstream 
processing. In both operations, up to about half of the waste 
is hauled to a nearby Martin Marietta gravel plant for use 
as road gravel. 

In 1981 Lithco expanded its Bessemer City annual ore 
capacity to about 680,000 mt; this would enable production 
of about 36 million lb (16,300 mt) Li 2 C0 3 (4). In 1980, the 
annual capacity of the Kings Mountain operation was in- 
creased to about 16 million lb (7,260 mt) Li 2 C0 3 , which 
would require an ore capacity of about 310,000 mt/yr. 

Beneficiation 

Both operations use flotation as a beneficiation method. 
The spodumene concentrates average between 6.0 and 6.5 
pet Li 2 (2.79 and 3.02 pet Li). One feature of the concen- 
tration is desliming after grinding. The gangue minerals 
are softer than the spodumene, and therefore some of them 
grind finer and are discarded as slimes (minus 200-mesh). 
A small amount of the spodumene concentrates at the Foote 
Mineral Co. operation are used directly in the ceramics in- 
dustry; the remainder is converted to chemicals. The plants 
also produce a feldspar-quartz (glasspar) concentrate that 
is shipped to the glass industry and a mica concentrate used 
by local companies. Lithco has a subsidiary, Spartan 
Minerals Co., Spartanburg, SC, for the marketing of its mica 
concentrates. 

Li 2 C0 3 Production 

The Li 2 C0 3 plants at both Kings Mountain and 
Bessemer City use a H 2 S0 4 process; the plants are located 
near the mines and are about 15 km apart. These plants 
are the only significant MEC producers of Li 2 C0 3 from 
spodumene. A few other companies may produce a variety 
of lithium products in small batch operations, but their pro- 
duction is relatively insignificant. 

The H 2 S0 4 process involves treating a spodumene con- 
centrate of about 6.0 pet Li 2 (2.79 pet Li). The concentrate 
is first heated to about 1,075°-1,100°C in a kiln to produce 
a more reactive and soft /3-spodumene. This calcine is cool- 
ed, then mixed with concentrated H 2 SO„ and heated to 
250°C in an acid roaster to dissolve the lithium. The 
acidified concentrate is neutralized with ground limestone 
and filtered, resulting in an impure solution of lithium 
sulfate (Li 2 SO„). The solution undergoes several filtering, 
pH adjustment, and evaporation steps and is then reacted 
with NajCO;; to produce Li 2 C0 3 . Other lithium products (i.e., 
LiOH, LiCl, etc.) are produced in the stream process of the 
Lithco plant. The Foote Mineral Co. plant produces only 
Li 2 C0 3 ; its other products are produced at plants in Penn- 
sylvania, Virginia, and Tennessee. 

Zaire 

The Kitotolo deposit is located in the north Shaba region 
about 15 km southwest of the Manono tin-tantalite mine. 
(See figure 2). The deposit is owned by Zairetain, a company 
owned by the Government of Zaire (50 pet) and Companie 
Geologique et Miniere des Ingenieurs et Industriels Beiges 
(Geomines). 

The original discovery was in 1912 on the Manono tin- 



14 



tantalum deposit, which has been operating relatively con- 
tinuously since about 1919; the Kitotolo deposit has never 
had any production of significance. It has been explored 
periodically, but none of the exploration has been very 
intensive. 

The Kitotolo deposit is located in mica schists of the 
highly folded and metamorphosed Kibara complex. The 
regional structure strikes northeast and generally dips 
steeply to the northwest. The pegmatite zone is massive and 
contains various types of individual pegmatites. The 
spodumene content varies but can be as much 25 pet. It oc- 
curs as small component crystals, large disseminated 
crystals, or as giant crystals forming spodumene bands. 
Cassiterite and columbite-tantalite also occur as small 
grains disseminated throughout the pegmatite. 

A prominent feature of the area is the severe weather- 
ing that has taken place on the pegmatites. The zone of 
weathering on the Kitotolo deposit is between 10 and 30 
m in depth. The surface has been weathered to a sandy soil, 
and the effects of the weathering gradually decrease 
downward until the unweathered pegmatite is reached. 

Mining on the Manono deposit has concentrated on the 
weathered zone; however, as this approached depletion, min- 
ing was started on the unweathered rock from 1951-56. 

The undeveloped Kitotolo deposit is regarded as being 
the largest spodumene pegmatite in the world. One estimate 
places the resources at 1.94 million mt of contained Li 2 
(901,000 mt Li) (16). For the purpose of this study, the 
demonstrated resources are estimated at 31.5 million mt 
of material containing 2 pet Li 2 (0.98 pet Li), 0.15 pet Sn0 2 , 
and 0.0174 pet Cb 2 5 plus Ta 2 5 in the unweathered 
pegmatites. This study concentrates solely on the resources 
contained in the unweathered pegmatites. 

If mining were to be initiated, it would probably be on 
the south side of the Kitotolo deposit where some mining 
on the weathered zone has already exposed the unweathered 
rock, thereby eliminating the need for preproduction 
stripping. 

Beneficiation would require a gravity section of jigs and 
tables similar to the Manono flowsheet in order to recover 
tin and columbite-tantalite. This would be followed by 
spodumene flotation. The spodumene concentrates would 
have to be transported by a combination of truck, rail, and 
barge for about 2,000 km to Matadi (Zaire) for shipment 
to markets. 

In view of the limited market for these spodumene con- 
centrates (the market is supplied by much better situated 
mines) and the remoteness of the deposit, it is unlikely that 
there would be any development for spodumene in this area 
in the foreseeable future. 



Zimbabwe 

The Bikita operation is located in Zimbabwe about 70 
km east of Masrringo, formerly Fort Victoria. (See figure 
2.) It is owned by Bikita Minerals International Ltd. (51 
pet), AMAX Inc., and Kerr-McGee Chemicals Corp. 

Cassiterite was discovered in 1909, and along with tin, 
both lithium and tantalum were produced from about 1916 
to 1960. Beryl production began in 1950 on a small scale. 
Currently, the primary commodities are the lithium 
minerals of spodumene, lepidolite, and petalite. A small 
amount of pollucite is also produced intermittently depend- 
ing on contracts. From 1955 to 1960 production focused on 
lepidolite for shipment to Texas. This material was intended 



to help supply the U.S. stockpile. Lepidolite is not present- 
ly considered applicable for conversion to chemicals because 
of the high fluorine emissions during roasting. A certain 
amount of feldspar is also produced for local consumption. 

The Bikita pegmatites occur in a series of greenstones, 
metasediments, and intrusive ultramafic rocks and have 
a relatively complex mineralogy. The main pegmatite 
strikes northwest and has a length of over 1,600 m with 
a width of nearly 40 m. It dips to the southeast at up to 45° 
and extends to at least 60 m in depth. 

Two zones have been mined within the pegmatite area: 
these are the Bikita open pit and underground workings 
and the adjacent Al Hayat pit on the north. The Bikita 
workings have produced mainly petalite and lepidolite with 
lesser amounts of spodumene, amblygonite, eucryptite, 
bikitaite, beryl, tantalite, pollucite, and cassiterite. The Al 
Hayat pit produces mainly petalite with lesser amounts of 
spodumene and lepidolite. The mineralogy at Bikita is much 
more complex than that at Al Hayat, as is evidenced by the 
wide variety of minerals produced at Bikita. 

The tin, tantalum, beryl, and pollucite zones are 
physically separated from the lithium mineral zones and 
are thus mined and processed separately. The individual 
lithium-bearing zones (i.e., spodumene, petalite, etc.) are 
most generally separate but sometimes are mined as mixed 
ore. 

Resources have been estimated for the total Bikita 
pegmatite at 10.8 million mt in situ with a grade of about 
3 pet Li 2 (1.4 pet Li) (31). An earlier study estimated the 
resources at about 5.4 million mt containing 2.9 pet Li 2 
(1.35 pet Li) (28). The company has stated that resources 
could last well into the next century (1). For the purpose 
of this report, the in situ demonstrated resources about 3.80 
million mt are assumed. The 10.8 million mt value is 
assumed to be at the identified level. 

Mining is by open pit and selective by mineral depend- 
ing on market conditions. Currently, the most important 
production is in petalite. Earlier underground exploration 
drifts under the Bikita pit are used for haulage from both 
the Bikita and Al Hayat pits. The ore is dumped into a raise 
in the Bikita pit and passes into pockets from where it is 
loaded into ore cars for transport to the mill. 

The milling method at Bikita is very complex involv- 
ing several crushing, screening, and handsorting steps 
where the ore is crushed and screened and sorted for one 
mineral at a time. The rejects from one step are recrushed 
and handpicked for another mineral. Spodumene and 
lepidolite rejects can be treated separately at a small flota- 
tion plant; the plant is used mainly for spodumene. In 1978 
the company built a fine-grinding plant to provide a fine- 
ground product. 

The minerals are generally of high quality and are in 
demand for specific ceramic products in Zimbabwe, Europe, 
and United States. Most of the pollucite (cesium) is shipped 
to Japan. 

BRINES 

Brines contain the largest lithium resource among the 
MEC deposits evaluated. Total demonstrated resources of 
the three brine areas analyzed in this study are estimated 
to contain over 1.4 million mt Li. Two of these, Salar de 
Atacama, Chile, and Silver Peak, NV, are currently pro- 
ducing; Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia, is being explored. In- 
dividual resources in terms of contained lithium are listed 
in table 9. 



15 



Table 9. — Demonstrated lithium brine resources used 
in this study (16; 20; 26; 27, p. 13) 


Location 




Li, 10 6 mt Grade, 
Total identified Demonstrated pet Li 
(contained) (recoverable) 


Bolivia: Salar de Uyuni .... 
Chile: Salar de Atacama. . . 




5.5 0.101 0.025 
4.3 1.300 .125 


United States: Silver Peak, 


NV. 


.124 .065 .03 



Table 10. — Element resources, Salar de Atacama, 
Chile (12) 

(Million metric tons) 

Boron 2.9 

Lithium 4.5 

Magnesium 30.5 

Potassium 58.0 



Bolivia 

Salar de Uyuni is located in southwestern Bolivia near 
the border with Chile. (See figure 2.) The nearest port is 
Antofagasta, Chile, a distance of about 450 km. The Salar 
de Uyuni is the largest of the central Andes salt basins, with 
an area of about 9,000 km 2 and at an elevation of over 3,650 
m. Detailed exploration has not been performed on the salar, 
but there has been some preliminary testing. An average 
grade of about 0.025 pet Li is generally used for this salar 
(12), although sampling has indicated grades ranging from 
0.004 to 0.115 pet Li (5). 

Resources have been reported as 5.5 million mt Li, as 
well as 100 million mt K, and 3.2 million mt B (20). It is 
not known how these figures were estimated, but it appears 
that they could be resource estimates inclusive of the total 
areal extent of the Salar (9,000 km 2 ). 

The deposit was included in the evaluation principally 
because of the extensive resource quantity indicated and 
the reported interest that has been shown for exploitation. 
It is not felt, however, that exploration has established the 
entire resources as demonstrated. For this reason, 
demonstrated resources are limited to a proposed produc- 
tion life of 80 yr at a rate of about 6,350 mt/yr Li 2 C0 3 . 

Although research into lithium recovery has been per- 
formed on the Salar de Uyuni brines, few of the data are 
available. The grade is roughly an order of magnitude less 
than that of the Salar de Atacama brines. In addition, the 
brine contains an extremely high Mg-Li ratio of about 21.5, 
compared with ratios of 6.6 and 1.5 at Salar de Atacama 
and Silver Peak, respectively. 

Chile 

The Salar de Atacama is a salt basin in northern Chile 
encompassing about 3,000 km 2 . The nucleus of the basin, 
considered to be the primary lithium resource area, covers 
approximately 1,300 km 2 . By comparison, the current opera- 
tion that was brought onstream in 1984 covers an area of 
a little less than 170 km 2 . The complex is operated by 
Sociedad Chilena de Litio Ltda. and is owned 55 pet by Foote 
Mineral Co. and 45 pet by Corporacion de Fomento de la 
Produccion (CORFO), the Chilean Government's develop- 
ment company agency. As the mining progresses, it 
develops a possible exploitable resource of potash as a waste 
accumulation in some of the ponds. 

The lithium at Salar de Atacama was discovered in the 
early 1960's, and extensive surveys were made during 
1969-74. Studies leading to the current operations began 
in 1975, and construction started in 1981. The projected an- 
nual Li 2 C0 3 capacity of the operation is about 6,350 mt (14 
million lb). 

Test drilling on the nucleus ranged in depth from 40 
to 390 m; the highest porosity zone is near the top, and the 
occurrence of the lithium-rich brines begins at an average 
depth of about 0.6 m (12, p. 34). 

Within a control area of 420 km 2 with a high density 



of data, resources have been estimated at 1.3 million mt 
Li (recoverable). This is based on a depth of 20 m and a 
specific yield of 10 pet; that is, 10 pet porosity containing 
an average concentration of 0.125 pet Li. Data have been 
further extrapolated to the entire nucleus to indicate a 
resource of an additional 3 million mt Li (recoverable) (1 7). 

For the purpose of this study, the control area resources 
are considered demonstrated and the additional nucleus 
resources are considered inferred, resulting in a total iden- 
tified resource of 4.3 million mt Li. (See table 5.) 

The demonstrated lithium resource is equivalent to ap- 
proximately 7 million mt Li 2 C0 3 equivalent. At a rate of 
6,350 mt/yr, this quantity would last over 1,000 yr. For the 
purpose of estimating the potential availability of the 
deposit, the life is limited to 80 yr. Even this time period 
is extensive, given the future unknowns, such as likely ex- 
pansions and potential byproduct recovery. 

Another resource estimation includes other potential- 
ly recoverable commodities as well as lithium. (See table 
10.) As shown, there is a difference in the lithium quantity 
from that used in this study. In view of the recent nature 
of data on the deposit, however, this difference is not con- 
sidered significant. 

The brine containing about 0.125 pet Li is pumped from 
three wells drilled to a depth of 30 to 40 m, and is then con- 
centrated to about 4.3 pet Li (design strength) in a series 
of evaporative ponds ordered in three groups. The first group 
(four ponds) receives the brine and concentrates it to 0.4 
pet Li while precipitating the salt as halite (NaCl) and the 
potash as sylvinite (KC1). These minerals are periodically 
harvested from these ponds and stockpiled for possible 
future processing. The second group (three ponds) is used 
mainly to remove the magnesium, and the last group is used 
for final evaporation and storage for shipment to the 
chemical plant. The final brine is hauled about 60 km by 
truck and about 265 km by rail to the Li 2 C0 3 plant at La 
Negra (near Antofagasta). 

Conversion to Li 2 C0 3 from the LiCl brine is a relative- 
ly simple process. It consists of using hydrated lime 
(Ca(OH) 2 ) for final magnesium and calcium precipitation 
and soda ash (NaC0 3 ) for precipitation of Li 2 C0 3 . This is 
done under close pH and temperature controls and with at- 
tendant filtering and washing steps common to most 
chemical extraction processes. The 99.5-pct-Li 2 C0 3 concen- 
trate is generally packaged in bags or drums for ocean 
shipment. 

United States 

The Silver Peak (Clayton Valley) playa is located in cen- 
tral Esmeralda County, southwestern Nevada. The brine 
mining and evaporation ponds are located in Clayton Valley 
about 4 km from the Li 2 C0 3 chemical plant in the town of 
Silver Peak. The operation, owned by Foote Mineral Co., 
has been in operation since 1966. 

The first lithium exploration was undertaken in 1960, 
and the present company began serious work on the deposit 



16 



in 1964. The chemical plant was a gold-silver cyanidation 
plant that was bought at auction and converted to the pro- 
duction of Li 2 C0 3 . 

The Clayton Valley playa is a closed basin in which 
sediments consist mainly of a mixture of saline minerals 
and derivatives in the form of evaporates, clays, silts, and 
sands. The playa encompasses about 8,300 ha (83 km 2 ), and 
geophysical testing suggests the sediments may be as much 
as 460 m thick. Interstitial brines occur from a depth of 
about 9 to 180 m. 

Published estimates vary from 35,000 to 2.30 million 
mt Li (contained) including speculative resources (1 7, 23, 
27). For the purpose of this study, the demonstrated and 
identified resource quantities are estimated to contain 



65,000 and 124,000 mt Li (contained), respectively (28). 

The operation of the wells and evaporation ponds is very 
similar to that of Salar de Atacama. The main difference 
is in the quantity of brines pumped, which requires more 
wells (± 50) at a greater depth (up to about 180 m). To pro- 
duce a similar quantity of Li 2 C0 3 (both plants have annual 
Li 2 C0 3 capacity of about 6,350 mt), the Silver Peak opera- 
tion must pump about four times more brine and have a 
larger pond area. The conversion process of the LiCl in the 
brine to Li 2 C0 3 is also similar to that used at Atacama. 

The product is hauled about 80 km to a packaging plant 
at the Mina, NV, railhead where it is either shipped to other 
Foote plants for making downstream products (i.e., 
butyllithium, LiOHH 2 0, etc.) or sold f.o.b railhead. 



PRODUCTION COSTS 



Operating and capital investments for the appropriate 
mining beneficiation and postmill processing methods were 
estimated for each property. Where possible, actual capital 
and operating costs were obtained from published material 
or contacts with company personnel. When actual costs were 
unavailable, costs were estimated, using standardized 
costing techniques. 

Operating costs for the mine and mill are computed as 
a total of direct and indirect costs of production including 
costs associated with utilities, labor, administrative costs, 
facilities maintenance, supplies and research. The operating 
costs presented in this section are weighted averages per- 
metric-ton-of-ore or per pound of Li 2 C0 3 over the life of the 
operation. Costs in parentheses represent contained lithium. 

Operating cost information is presented on the basis of 
mine type (surface, underground or brine) and status. To 
standardize the evaluation, a common year dollar base was 
used. The cost data were collected in January 1982 dollars 
and updated to January 1984 dollars, for the analyses. 



MINING AND BENEFICIATION COSTS 

At the time of this analysis, four surface mining and 
two brine operations were producers; seven underground, 
two surface, and one brine operation were nonproducers. 
Except for the recovery of lithium from brines, mining 
follows generally applied methods. There are currently no 
operating underground lithium mines within the MEC's. 
Pegmatites, which host most lithium deposits, are relatively 
competent and therefore present minimal ground support 
problems. All of the proposed underground mines would pro- 
bably utilize room-and-pillar and or sublevel blasthole stop- 
ing methods. Room-and-pillar mining generally has low 
dilution and high overall recovery, especially if the pillars 
are robbed in the later stages of the mine's life. Sublevel 
blasthole stoping generally results in a low dilution of about 
10 pet and recovery generally exceeding 80 pet. 

Underground operating costs (all nonproducers) are 
estimated to range from a low of $16.50/mt ore (room and 
pillar) to a high of $36.00 (various stoping methods). The 
high costs result from higher labor costs and relatively low 
productivity owing to complex mining and a relatively low 
mine capacity. 

The major factors affecting surface mining costs include 
labor costs and productivity, energy costs, haulage 
distances, and stripping ratios. The surface mine operating 



costs for nonproducers range from $2/mt ore to $9/mt ore. 
The higher costs are in Canada where the remoteness of 
the deposits requires high labor costs. Surface mining costs 
for the producers range from about $5/mt ore to $18/mt ore. 
The variation is mainly caused by the difference in strip- 
ping ratios, which vary from 0.7 to 5. 

Beneficiation of lithium ore involves mainly flotation 
(sometimes enhanced by gravity and magnetic methods); 
handpicking of complex ore is required at Bikita. Additional 
circuits may be necessary, however, in order to recover 
byproducts. Beneficiation costs for the producers range from 
about $7/mt ore for the simplest process, to $23/mt ore where 
the process includes the recovery of the more refactory 
byproducts. Of course the higher costs are defrayed by the 
byproduct revenues. Among the nonproducers, the lowest 
beneficiation costs are about $7/mt ore, while the highest 
are $23/mt. Tantalum and tin are potentially recoverable 
byproducts and add to beneficiation cost of the high-cost pro- 
perty. About 30 pet for the cost of beneficiation for the low- 
cost property is for ore haulage from the mine to the millsite. 

Costs associated with postmill processing of spodumene 
concentrates are not available because of their highly pro- 
prietary nature and are therefore not discussed. 



LITHIUM BRINES 

The current interest in the recovery of lithium from 
brines in Bolivia and Chile results primarily from increas- 
ing costs associated with relatively high labor and fuel in- 
tensive requirements of hardrock mining and beneficiation. 
Based on the requirements of equipment, complexity of the 
installation, labor requirements and energy use, the cost 
of extraction of Li 2 C0 3 from brines appear to be substan- 
tially less than extraction from spodumene. 

The Silver Peak, NV, operation is the oldest and appears 
to have the lowest cost among all of the evaluated brine 
deposits, since all the initial capital costs have been 
depreciated. The processing of brines at the Salar de 
Atacama property in Chile is quite similar to that at Silver 
Peak except that the Chilean brines have a higher lithium 
content; however, the property carries the burden of capital 
depreciation. Based on an estimated annual output of about 
6,350 mt Li 2 C0 3 (1,183 mt Li) from brines in Chile, process- 
ing from brine to product is estimated at under $0.75/lb 
Li 2 C0 3 . The total capital requirement is estimated at about 
$48 million January 1984 dollars or approximately $3.50/lb 



17 



Table 1 1 .—Lithium concentrate transportation costs 



Country and property 1 



Destination 



Distance, km 



Primary mode of 
transportation 



Cost, 

Jan. 1984 

$/mt 2 



Australia: Greenbushes. 
Bolivia: Salar de Uyuni . . 
Canada: 

Bernic Lake 

Buck-Coe-Pegli 

Georgia Lake 

Jean Lake 

Lac la Croix 

Nama Creek 

Quebec Lithium 

Yellowknife 

Chile: Salar de Atacama. 
United States: 

Bessemer City 

Kings Mountain 

Silver Peak 

Zaire: Kitotolo 

Zimbabwe: Bikita 



Bunbury, Australia. 
Antofagasta, Chile. 



Thunder Bay, Canada 
do 



.do 

.do 

.do 

.do 

Quebec City, Quebec. 
Prince Rupert, BC. . . 
Antofagasta, Chile. . . 



North Carolina 

...do.. 

Nevada 

Matadi, Zaire 

Masvingo to Durban, 
Republic of South Africa, 



80 
450 

800 
800 
145 
200 
200 
200 
700 
2,450 
325 

NAp 

NAp 

NAp 

2,000 

3,700 



Truck . 
Rail . . 



Rail . . 
.do 
.do 
.do 
.do 
.do 
.do 
.do 
.do 



NAp 

NAp 

NAp 

Barge and rail. 
Rail 



6 
45 

45 
50 
20 
25 
20 
20 
41 
120 
60 

NAp 

NAp 

NAp 

60 

75 



NAp Not applicable. 

1 U.S. properties process spodumene or brines on-site and distribute value-added products. 

2 Spodumene concentrate except for Bikita which produces petalite, and Salar de Atacama and Salar de Uyuni, which produce Li 2 C0 3 . 



of annual Li 2 C0 3 capacity. The costs include: (1) wells, pip- 
ing, salt recovery equipment, pond liners, trucks; (2) 
chemical plant; and (3) infrastructure. The costs were split 
approximately 27 pet, 48 pet, and 25 pet, respectively. 
Although much of the same type of equipment would be 
necessary at Salar de Uyuni, technical complications pro- 
duced by the brine chemistry may add significantly to the 
capital and operating costs. 

TRANSPORTATION 

Most lithium concentrate and Li„CO, in MEC's is sold 



from main ports, generally in Europe or the United States. 
In this study, concentrate was shipped to either the actual 
or most likely port for export. If the concentrate was treated 
locally into downstream products, as is done at Kings Moun- 
tain and Bessemer City in North Carolina, and the brines 
at Silver Peak, NV, there were little or no transportation 
charges. Costs for transportation (table 11) are estimates 
only; some taxes, handling costs, special rates, or fees and 
other additional costs may not be included. Costs for rail, 
truck, or other necessary modes of transportation from mill 
site to port are included. 



LITHIUM AVAILABILITY 



An economic evaluation was performed on each of the 
16 mines and deposits included in this study to determine 
the average total cost for the recovery of spodumene and 
petalite concentrate as well as Li 2 C0 3 from brines over the 
operations' production lives. The evaluations apply 
DCFROR techniques to determine the constant-dollar long- 
run average total cost of lithium production. This average 
total cost is equivalent to the lithium concentrate and 
Li 2 C0 3 price over the long run that each operation would 
require, so that the discounted sum of total revenues from 
the sale of lithium products and associated byproducts (if 
any) is sufficient to equal the discounted sum of all costs 
of production over the life of the operation. The annual cash 
flows are discounted at a prespecified rate of return. The 
economic evaluations for this study were performed at 0- 
and 15-pct DCFROR. A 0-pct DCFROR represents the 
"breakeven cost," which includes a return of but not on 
capital. A 15-pct DCFROR represents a minimum rate of 
return that might be required for a firm to develop a lithium 
operation and produce over the long term. 

An implicit assumption in each evaluation is that each 
operation or proposed operation represents a separate en- 
tity or operation. The life of each property was determined 
by assuming that the property would operate at 100 pet of 
mine capacity. The mine life covers only the demonstrated 
resource level, which is probably a conservative figure, 
especially in the case of resources in South American brine 
deposits. 



All capital investments incurred 15 yr or more before 
the cost date of analysis (January 1984) are treated as sunk 
costs. Investments incurred during the prior 15 yr have the 
undepreciated balances entered as a capital investment in 
1984. All subsequent investments, reinvestments, and 
operating and transportation costs are expressed in cons- 
tant (nonescalated January 1984) dollars. The resource and 
cost data evaluated for this study are based on January 1982 
data updated to January 1984 values. 

Investment and operating schedules are determined, as 
much as possible, from published data, actual onsite visits, 
or plans announced by the companies involved. For those 
deposits which have been explored, but where no plans to 
initiate production have been announced, a development 
plan was estimated. The preproduction period for these ex- 
plored deposits allows for only the minimum engineering 
and development time necessary to initiate production. Ad- 
ditional time lags and potential costs involved in filing en- 
vironmental impact statements, receiving required permits, 
arranging financing, etc., are not accounted for unless 
specific information was available. 

The potential tonnage and the average total cost deter- 
mined over the estimated producing life of each mine and 
deposit evaluated for this study have been aggregated on- 
to availability curves that illustrate the potential quanti- 
ty of lithium concentrate available at various costs. The 
availability curves are constructed as aggregations of the 
total amount of lithium potentially available from each 



18 



mine and deposit, ordered from those having the lowest 
average cost to those with the highest. 

The curve provides a concise, easy-to-read, graphic il- 
lustration of the comparative costs associated with any 
given level of potential output and provides an estimate of 
what the average long-run price (in January 1984 dollars) 
would likely have to be in order for a given tonnage to be 
potentially available to the marketplace. 

Two types of curves have been generated for this study: 
(1) total availability curves and (2) annual curves at selected 
total production costs. Annual curves are a disaggregation 
of the total curve to show annual lithium availability at 
varying costs of production. 

TOTAL AVAILABILITY 

For this study, 16 lithium properties in seven MEC's 
were evaluated. The 6 that were producing at the time of 
the study represent over 95 pet of the MEC production; the 
other 10 are nonproducers. (At the time of this study, Ber- 
nic Lake had just started operating on a pilot plant basis 
and was therefore not evaluated as a producer.) Among 
these properties, 1 is primarily a petalite property, 3 are 
lithium-enriched brines, and 12 are spodumene properties. 
Combined, these properties account for over 2 million mt 
Li (recoverable), of which about 84 pet is in the six current 
producers. The percentage share of total recoverable lithium 
by country and the relative share of recoverable lithium 
from producing and undeveloped deposits was previously 
illustrated in figure 4. Figure 4 shows the large 
demonstrated resources of Australia and the United States 
as producers and the significance of Canada among the non- 
producers. The figure dramatically illustrates potential of 
brines in South America. The resources of these regions 
have not as yet been fully demonstrated. Figure 5 illustrates 
the distribution of total recoverable and contained lithium 
in the three ore type products evaluated. 

The Bikita Mine, in Zimbabwe, is the only evaluated 
hardrock property that does not produce spodumene con- 
centrate as its primary mill product. The mine can produce 
approximately 38,500 mt/yr petalite concentrate of slight- 
ly over 4 pet Li 2 (1.86 pet Li). There is also some minor 
production of spodumene and lepidolite concentrates at 
Bikita, but they are not currently considered important as 
a long-term resource. 

The three brine properties— Salar de Atacama, Chile; 
Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia; and Silver Peak, NV— contain over 
7.8 million mt of recoverable Li 2 C0 3 (1.466 million mt Li). 
As previously mentioned, Li 2 C0 3 is produced from brines. 
Large additional lithium resources exist in these and other 
South American countries but have not been adequately 
quantified to be considered demonstrated. There is strong 
evidence, however, to support 80-yr operations for both 
Salar de Uyuni and Salar de Atacama and general accep- 
tance that sufficient resources exist to support multiple 
brine operations. 

The 12 spodumene hardrock properties could potentially 
produce over 26,169,000 mt of recoverable concentrate con- 
taining Li 2 (2.79 pet Li), or about 730,000 mt Li. Based 
on this study, currently producing spodumene mines ac- 
count for a total recoverable resource of 16,932,575 mt of 
spodumene concentrate averaging 6.06 pet Li 2 (476,640 
mt contained Li). 

Australia's producing Greenbushes property contains 
the single largest demonstrated hardrock resource 
evaluated in this study, with 7,621,900 mt of recoverable 
spodumene concentrate grading nearly 7 pet Li 2 2 (247,880 
mt contained Li). 



The second and third largest spodumene properties are 
Bessemer City and Kings Mountain, both U.S. producers; 
together, they could produce a total of a little over a million 
metric tons of concentrate at a grade of about 5.3 pet Li 2 
(229,000 mt contained Li). Kitotolo, a nonproducing proper- 
ty in Zaire, has a demonstrated resource of about 31,500,000 
mt ore that would yield only about 430,500 mt concentrate 
averaging 6 pet Li 2 (11,985 mt contained Li). The small 
concentrate production results from low recoveries during 
concentration owing to complexity of the ore, which also 
contains tin and tantalum in recoverable amounts. 

Total availability curves for the 12 spodumene proper- 
ties are not presented in order to avoid disclosure of pro- 
prietary cost data pertaining to the Bessemer City and 
Kings Mountain operations. Of the 26,169,000 mt of 
spodumene concentrate, 94 pet is available for less than the 
January 1984 published market price (approximately 
$330/mt) at a 0-pct DCFROR. This tonnage originates from 
the Bessemer City and Kings Mountain mines in the United 
States (33 pet), Greenbushes in Australia (36 pet), and 3 
undeveloped Canadian properties — Bernic Lake, 
Yellowknife, and Quebec Lithium (29 pet). The remaining 
portion originates from the undeveloped Kitotolo property 
in Zaire. The Yellowknife and Quebec Lithium properties 
are very marginal and would be uneconomic with just a 
slight lowering in grade, recovery, and/or increase in 
estimated costs. 

At a 15-pct DCFROR, 72 pet of the total spodumene con- 
centrates from the 12 properties is available for less than 
the January 1984 published market price. This tonnage 
originates from the two U.S. mines (44 pet), Greenbushes 
(47 pet), and Bernic Lake (9 pet). 

Canada 

Separate availability curves were constructed for the 
eight Canadian lithium properties (all potential spodumene 
producers) included in this study (fig. 6). None of these prop- 
erties were producing at the time of this study. In 1984 the 
Bernic Lake property began a pilot operation at about 150 
mt/d ore. 

Approximately 8,805,560 mt of spodumene concentrate, 
averaging 5.9 pet Li 2 (241,300 mt contained Li), is poten- 
tially recoverable from the Canadian deposits. At a 0-pct 
DCFROR, 82 pet of this total, all from the Bernic Lake, 
Quebec Lithium, and Yellowknife properties, is available 
for less than the January 1984 published market price for 
spodumene concentrate. About 75 pet of that portion 
(Quebec Lithium and Yellowknife) is very marginal and 
could become uneconomic with only a slight change in 
grade, estimated recoveries^- concentrate qualities, or costs. 
The total costs for the remaining five properties range from 
$375/mt to $640/mt. This study indicates that the Bernic 
Lake property offers the best opportunity for development 
at the January 1984 published price of spodumene concen- 
trate. A total of approximately 1,727,500 mt of concentrate 
at almost 7 pet Li 2 (nearly 50,000 mt contained Li) is 
available from Bernic Lake. The property's relatively 
favorable economic position results from currently existing 
infrastructure, working knowledge of the ore body (other 
parts of the pegmatite were mined for tantalum in the early 
1970's), and a relatively high feed grade of 2.5 pet Li 2 (1.16 
pet Li). 

At a 15-pct DCFROR, only the resources at Bernic Lake 
are available for less than the January 1984 published 
market price for spodumene concentrate. (In the year follow- 
ing this evaluation, Bernic Lake began operating on a pilot 



19 



LITHIUM EQUIVALENT, I0 6 mt 



c 

1,200 


) 


1 


2 3 4 5 




6 


7 




II II 1 


1 




1,000 




15-pct DCFROR--. 






— 


E 
*&■ 800 




1 


00 
CD 












o 

§ 600 










I - 


—3 




Estimated Jan. 1984 market value ot $330 







i 


h-" 

00 

o 
o 


— 


for 6-p 


ct spodumene concentrate 


r" 


— 


_l 400 


\ 






< 

1- 




\ 


i 


o 


"~ 




j 




— 


1- 

200 


\ 

0-pct DCFROR 












I 


1,1,1, 


1 


1 



50 100 150 200 250 

TOTAL RECOVERABLE LITHIUM CONCENTRATE, I0 6 mt 
Figure 6.— Spodumene concentrate availability from non producing Canadian properties at 0- and 15-pct DCFROR. 



plant basis. The remaining seven properties range from a 
total cost of $0.17/lb ($375/mt) to $0.49/lb ($l,080/mt). The 
weighted-average total cost for the eight Canadian proper- 
ties at a 15-pct DCFROR is $0.20/lb concentrate 
($445.50/mt). The estimated market value of this concen- 
trate could be in the order of $330/mt. 

Brines 

The total recoverable Li 2 C0 3 from brines at the three 
properties evaluated in this study (Salar de Atacama, Salar 
de Uyuni, and Silver Peak) is 6,665,000 mt Li 2 C0 3 
(1,466,000 mt Li), with a January 1984 market value ex- 
ceeding $3 billion. Additional demonstrated resources are 
very likely present in the salares of Bolivia and Chile but 
were excluded owing to the lack of supporting data. The 
weighted-average total cost at 0-pct and 15-pct DCFROR 
for the three properties evaluated are $0.70 and $1.40, 
respectively. The large difference primarily results from the 
higher required return on newly invested capital at the 
South American properties. Silver Peak, NV, and Salar de 
Atacama, Chile, are currently operating. The two produc- 
ing brine operations can produce for less than the published 
market price of $1.48/lb Li 2 C0 3 (January 1984) at both 0- 
and 15-pct DCFROR. The Silver Peak operation has a 



significant competitive advantage resulting primarily from 
depreciated capital costs and low transportation charges. 
The nonproducer, Salar de Uyuni, would require a market 
price at less than $1.00/lb and $2.00/lb Li 2 C0 3 in order to 
produce at a 0- or a 15-pct DCFROR, respectively. This 
economic estimate may be optimistic owing to potential 
metallurgical complications that could be caused by a high 
magnesium content. Several other properties have been in- 
vestigated in the salar regions in Argentina, Bolivia, and 
Chile but few published data are currently available. 
AMAX Inc., a U.S. company, has stated that it is currently 
negotiating an agreement with Chile to potentially develop 
a new brine operation in the Atacama region. 



ANNUAL AVAILABILITY 

Another method of illustrating lithium availability in- 
volves disaggregating the total resource availability curve 
and showing potential availability on an annual basis. 
Separate annual availability analyses have been con- 
structed for producing mines and proposed (undeveloped) 
operations in MEC's. Since no accurate development 
schedule can be proposed for all of the undeveloped deposits, 
the emphasis of these tables or curves is to indicate 



20 



Total 



7,580 
8,700 
8,700 

1,640 
8,720 
8,240 



Table 12.— Potential annual lithium production 
from producing mines and undeveloped deposits 

(Metric tons Li equivalent) 

Year 1 Spodumene Brines Petalite 

Producing mines: 

1984 5,120 1,690 770 

1990 5,550 2,380 770 

2000 5,550 2,380 770 

Undeveloped deposits: 

N + 1 1,640 

N+5 7,780 940 

N + 10 7,300 940 

1 N = year preproduction development begins. 



estimated future potential capacity at estimated 1984 cost 
levels. 

Producing Mines 

Potential total annual production was analyzed for six 
producers of lithium; three produce spodumene concentrate 
(Bessemer City, Greenbushes, and Kings Mountain); one 
produces a petalite concentrate (Bikita); and two produce 
Li 2 C0 3 (Salar de Atacama and Silver Peak) derived from 
brines. These production figures could not be plotted on the 
same curves owing to different product types and values 
plus the small number of data points; however, the poten- 
tial annual production in terms of lithium equivalent is 
tabulated in table 12. 

The annual availability analysis reflects the production 
capacity of existing mines, including planned expansions. 
It was assumed that all operations produce at full (100-pct) 
capacity over the life of the mine. The analysis, therefore, 
cannot take into account sales or stockpiling, production 
cutbacks or unannounced expansions mandated by market 
conditions, or byproduct lithium potentially available from 
other sources. These factors vary on an annual basis and 
are difficult to project. A comparison of 1984 estimated pro- 
duction with the estimated production capacity in this study 
reveals that an apparent surplus capacity exists. (See tables 
2 and 12.) 

The three producing spodumene properties— Bessemer 
City and Kings Mountain in North Carolina and Green- 
bushes in Australia— have sufficient demonstrated 
resources to produce, at evaluated capacities, through the 
year 2000. In this evaluation, Greenbushes is assumed to 
expand production of concentrate at 7 pet Li 2 from a cur- 
rent 15,000 mt (488 mt Li) to 25,000 mt (812 mt Li) in 1987. 
No information pertaining to any planned expansions at 
the domestic spodumene properties was available, nor was 
any assumed. 

Bikita, a petalite property that has supplied some 
spodumene and lepidolite in the past, can also produce 
petalite concentrate at 4.2 pet Li 2 through the year 2000 
at an annual capacity of about 39,600 mt (773 mt Li). 
Although not assumed in this study, there is a likelihood 
that Bikita will undergo some modernization of its 
beneficiation facilities at some time in the near future. 

Both of the evaluated Li 2 C0 3 producers (Salar de 
Atacama and Silver Peak) have the resources to operate 
through the year 2000 and for some time beyond. Total an- 
nual capacity from the producing brine properties evaluated 
is nearly 9,000 mt Li 2 C0 3 (1,690 mt Li), or about 22 pet of 
the total lithium among the evaluated producers. An ex- 
pected increase in production at Salar de Atacama in 1985 
would increase the portion of lithium from brines to near- 
ly 30 pet of total MEC lithium production. An important 



consideration in anticipating future market conditions is 
that development of additional wells and processing 
facilities in the Atacama Basin is likely, and that there will 
be a resultant increase in supply from Chilean lithium pro- 
ducers. If this scenario were to occur, Chile could have a 
major impact on the market structure and price of the 
commodity. 

In 1984 (table 12), the evaluated lithium producers had 
a total capacity of approximately 7,580 mt Li, 68 pet from 
spodumene, 22 pet from Li 2 C0 3 , and 10 pet from petalite 
properties. Potential annual capacity from these producers 
is estimated to increase to nearly 8,700 mt Li by 1990. Pro- 
duction at Salar de Atacama was projected to increase from 
3,000 mt Li 2 C0 3 (563 mt Li) in 1984 to about 6,300 mt 
Li 2 C0 3 (1,835 mt Li) in 1985; and stepped-up production at 
Greenbushes, was assumed to take place in 1987, from 
15,000 mt of spodumene concentrate at 7 pet Li0 2 (488 mt 
Li) to 25,000 mt at the same grade (813 mt Li). After the 
proposed increases, the percentage distribution of product 
types is essentially the same as in 1984. At a 0-pct 
DCFROR, all of the lithium products were available for less 
than the January 1984 published market prices. At a 15-pct 
DCFROR, the highest production cost was no more than 
1 pet over the price. 

Nonproducing Properties 

The potential annual availability totals include mine 
nonproducing potential spodumene producers of which eight 
are in Canada and one is in Zaire. The Canadian proper- 
ties are Bernic Lake (TANCO began operating Bernic Lake 
on a pilot scale basis in late 1984), Yellowknife, Quebec 
Lithium, Buck-Coe-Pegli, Georgia Lake, Nama Creek, Jean 
Lake, and Lac la Croix. The other nonproducing spodumene 
property, Kitotolo, is in Zaire. The nonproducing brine pro- 
perty, Salar de Uyuni, could produce Li 2 C0 3 from lithium- 
enriched brine in Bolivia. The spodumene properties are 
included on curves at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR in figure 
7. Since no definite startup is known or available for any 
of these deposits, it was assumed that preproduction begins 
in a base year (N). Although these curves do not show a 
definite startup date, they do show the required lead times 
before production can begin and therefore are important in 
that they illustrate the annual production potential. In 
these curves, all of the undeveloped deposits are assumed 
to begin preproduction development at the same time, in 
the year "N." 

Table 12 lists potential lithium production at selected 
time intervals for the nonproducing spodumene and brine 
(Li 2 C0 3 ) properties. If development were to begin on the 
evaluated nonproducing lithim deposits in year "N," by the 
beginning of N + 1 approximately 59,000 mt of spodumene 
concentrate (1,640 mt Li) at an average grade of nearly 6 
pet Li 2 would be produced. Nearly 70 pet of the lithium 
production would originate from the Bernic Lake deposit. 
The remaining production would come from initial produc- 
tion from the Quebec Lithium deposit. At a 0-pct DCFROR 
all of the this material would be available for less than the 
January 1984 market price for concentrate, although 
Quebec Lithium is very marginal. At a 15-pct DCFROR, 
only production from the Bernic Lake deposit would be 
economic. 

By N + 5, 283,000 mt of spodumene concentrate, 
primarily from Canada at an average grade of 5.91 pet Li 2 
(7,770 mt contained Li) plus an additional 5,000 mt Li 2 C0 3 
(940 mt Li) from Salar de Uyuni (not included on the curve) 



21 



3,000 



2,500 



2,000 



1,500 



E 
O 1,000 

i- 
< 



A 0-pctDCFROR 



// 



// 



7 : 



/' 



y 500 

g 3,000 
o 

UJ 

z 

LU 

§ 2,500 

0. 
CO 



2,000 



1,500 



1,000 



500 



S 15-pct DCFROR 



r 



/ 



$220 

$330 

$550 

$660 

$1,100 

N Year preproduction 
development begins 




N + 2 



N + 4 



N + 6 



-6 



E 
to 
O 

2 \S 
Z 
UJ 

_l 
< 
> 

o 



-7 



-6 



3 
X 



N + 8 



N + 10 



YEAR 



Figure 7.— Annual spodumene concentrate availability from nonproducing properties at 0- and 15-pct DCFROR. 



22 



would result in a combined total of 8,710 mt Li. This com- 
pares with an estimated 5,400 mt Li produced in 1984 by 
MEC's and nearly 7,000 mt worldwide. At a 0-pct DCFROR 
nearly 70 pet of this total is available for less than the 
January 1984 market price of the respective commodities. 
Most of the material would originate from Canada (65 pet), 
followed by Bolivia (20 pet) and Zaire (15 pet). At a 15-pct 
DCFROR only Bernic Lake can produce for less than the 
market price. The market price would have to exceed 
$0.29/lb or $639/mt of spodumene concentrate in order to 
allow all of the hardrock properties to attain a 0-pct 
DCFROR and $0.49/lb or $l,080/mt of concentrate to attain 
at least a 15-pct DCFROR. As previously mentioned, the 
Salar de Uyuni property could produce for less than the 
market price of Li 2 C0 3 at a 0-pct DCFROR; but in order 
to achieve a 15-pct DCFROR, it would require a price at 



least 20 pet higher than the market price. Salar de Uyuni's 
relatively high costs result from the return required on in- 
vested capital. 

In the year N + 10 approximately 8,240 mt Li is still 
potentially available from these nonproducing properties. 
The reduced tonnage is the result of the exhaustion of 
estimated ore resources at the Buck-Coe-Pegli Mine in 
Canada and declining production at Nama Creek as its 
demonstrated resource becomes depleted. At a 0-pct 
DCFROR, abut 60 pet of the total tonnage is available for 
at or less than the January 1984 published market price 
(although nearly 50 pet of this amount is essentially the 
same as the January 1984 market price). At a 15-pct 
DCFROR only about 20 pet of the total tonnage is 
economically available, all of which would originate from 
the Bernic Lake deposit. 



SUMMARY 



Based on the evaluation of the selected producing mines, 
and in terms of lithium contained in concentrates (see table 
12), approximately 5,225 mt Li can currently be produced 
annually from spodumene properties, 1,690 mt Li from 
brines, and 770 mt Li from petalite concentrate, for a total 
of 7,685 mt Li. Production data for 1983 indicated that 
only about 86 mt Li was contained in concentrates produced 
from nonevaluated MEC deposits: 54 mt from Brazil, 18 mt 
from Namibia, 9 mt from Portugal, and 5 mt from Argen- 
tina. This production, mostly byproduct in origin, was 
believed to be about the same in 1985. In addition, about 



1,270 mt was reportedly produced in the Soviet Union and 
nearly 320 mt in China (9). Production statistics for the cen- 
trally planned economy countries (CPEC's) should be con- 
sidered as broad estimates. MEC production was about 80 
pet of capacity in 1984. All of the producing mines evaluated 
have mine lives, at current design capacity, exceeding 20 
yr, and there are additional undeveloped resources available 
at relatively low costs from Bernic Lake and from the 
salares of Chile. As a result, no near- or long-term shortage 
of lithium, in its various forms, is likely. 



CONCLUSIONS 



Lithium has important applications in high technology 
due to its ability to contribute desirable properties to a 
number of commercial products. Historically, the United 
States has dominated the production and sale of lithium 
products among the MEC's and is self-reliant in this com- 
modity. The 16 lithium properties evaluated for this study 
in 7 MEC's represent a demonstrated recoverable tonnage 
of over 2,214,000 mt Li contained in brines, spodumene, and 
petalite ores. Producing operations account for about 84 pet 
of the total. At a 0-pct DCFROR all of the operating mines 
can produce for less than the January 1984 market price. 
As the Salar de Atacama property continues to produce and 
expand, it will most likely become more efficient and less 
costly to operate. This study only evaluated demonstrated 
resources, which does not fully reflect the potential of the 
Atacama region. Identified resource estimates exceed 11 
million mt Li (recoverable). 

As of 1984, the influx of new lithium production from 
Greenbushes, Australia, and Salar de Atacama, Chile, as 
well as the likely development of Bernic Lake, Canada, pre- 



sent a strong threat to the position of the United States as 
the major supplier to the MEC's and an increased world 
capacity that is already larger than current market demand. 
Presently, domestic producers can supply lithium, in its 
various forms, at competitive prices; but the hardrock mines 
of the United States (responsible for most of the production) 
could lose their competitive edge if the costs for labor, fuel, 
and supplies increase. These increases could provide an ex- 
cellent opportunity for the further development of brines, 
especially those in the Atacama Basin. The tremendous 
potential for the low-cost recovery of lithium in brines, 
especially those in Chile's Atacama Basin, cannot be 
overlooked by companies operating hardrock mines. This 
potential is an important component in anticipating future 
market conditions, especially considering Chile's need for 
foreign exchange. The production of lithium from additional 
wells and processing facilities in the Atacama Basin could 
put Chile in the position to potentially control the price of 
lithium. 



23 



REFERENCES 



1. Bikita Minerals (Pvt.) Ltd. An Introduction to the Company. 
Company Brochure. 1980, 8 pp. 

2. Crouse, R.A., P. Cerny, D.L. Trueman, and R.O. Burt. The 
Tanco Pegmatite, Southeastern Manitoba. CIM Bull., v. 73, No. 
802, Feb. 1979, pp. 142-151. 

3. Davidoff, R.L. Supply Analysis Model (SAM): A Minerals 
Availability System Methodology. BuMines IC 8820, 1980, 45 pp. 

4. Engineering and Mining Journal. Lithco Completes U.S. Ex- 
pansion To Meet Anticipated Demand. V. 183, No. 11, Nov. 1981, 
p. 43. 

5. Erickson, G.E., J.D. Vine, and R. Ballon. Chemical Composi- 
tion and Distribution of Lithium-Rich Brines in Salar de Uyuni 
and Nearby Salars in Southwestern Bolivia. Energy, v. 3, 1978, 
pp. 355-363. 

6. Ferrell, J.E. Lithium. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Problems, 
1985 Edition. BuMines B 675, 1985, pp. 461-470. 

7 Lithium. Ch. in BuMines Minerals Yearbook 1983, 

v. 1, pp. 575-580. 

8. Foote Mineral Co. 1982 10-K Report. P. 1-3. 

9. Greenbushes Tin Ltd. 1982 Annual Report. P. 7. 

10. Gulf Resources Corp. 1982 10-K Report. P. 9. 

11. Hale, R.W. Lithium — Present and Future and Its Meaning 
to the Canadian Mining Industry. CIM Bull., v. 16, No. 441, Sept. 
1962, p. 640. 

12. Ide, F.L., and P. Pavlovic-Zuvic. Salar Pond Design for the 
Production of Potassium Salts From the Salar de Atacama Brines. 
Pres. at the Sixth International Salt Symposium, Toronto, Ontario, 
May 1983, p. 36; available on request from D.I. Bleiwas, BuMines, 
Denver, CO. 

13. Industrial Minerals (London). Prices. No. 196, Jan. 1984, p. 81. 

14. Ingham, W.N., and M. Latulippe. Lithium Deposits of the 
LaCorne Area, Quebec. The Geology of Canadian Industrial 
Mineral Deposits. CIM Ind. Miner. Div. Spec. Publ., 1957, p. 162. 

15. Lithium Raw Materials in Industrial Minerals and 

Rocks. AIME, 1975, pp. 791-803. 

16. Kesler, T. Raw Lithium Supplies. Min. Eng. (N.Y.), v. 30, No. 
3, Mar. 1978, p. 284. 



17. Kunasz, LA., and P.Z. Pavlovic. The Salar de Atacama — A 
New Center of Lithium Production. Pres. at the Fifth Industrial 
Minerals Conference, May 15-19, 1982. Available on request from 
D.I. Blewas, BuMines, Denver, CO. 

18. Lasmanis, R. Lithium Resources in the Yellowknife Area, 
Northwest Territories, Canada. Energy, v. 3, 1978, pp. 399-407. 

19. Lien, R.H. Recovery of Lithium From a Montmorillonite-Type 
Clay. BuMines RI 8967, 1985, 26 pp. 

20. Mining Journal (London). Bolivia's Hard Struggle. V. 303, 
No. 7858, Apr. 29, 1983, p. 283. 

21. SCL Lithium Expansion Plans. V. 305, No. 7825, Aug. 

9, 1985, p. 102. 

22. Mulligan, R. Canadian Lithium Deposits. Geol. Surv. Can., 
Econ. Geol. Rep. 21, 1965, pp. 50, 66, 77. 

23. Norton, J.J. Lithium, Cesium and Rubidium — The Rare 
Alkali Metals. Ch. in United States Mineral Resources. U.S. Geol. 
Surv. Prof. Paper 820, 1973, p. 367. 

24. Olivier, C.A., and E.H. Nenninger. Continuous Process for 
the Production of Lithium Carbonate. CIM Bull., v. 73, No. 807, 
July 1979, pp. 131-136. 

25. Pye, E.G. Lithium in Northwest Ontario. Can. Min. J., 77, 
No. 4, Apr. 1956, p. 73. 

26. Shay, F.B. Low Cost Lithium from Brine at Silver Peak, 
Nevada. Pres. at Annual AIME Meeting, Los Angeles, CA, Feb. 
16-18, 1967, p. 3; available on request from D.I. Bleiwas, Denver, 
CO. 

27. Singleton, R.H. Lithium. BuMines Mineral Commodity Pro- 
file, 1979, pp. 6-7, 13. 

28. Symons, R. Operation at Bikita Minerals (Pvt.) Ltd., Southern 
Rhodesia. Inst. Min. and Metall. Bull., v. 71, 1961, p. 147. 

29. U.S. Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbooks, 1980-84. Chapter 
on Lithium. 

30. U.S. Bureau of Mines and U.S. Geological Survey. Principles 
of a Resource/Reserve Classification for Minerals. U.S. Geol. Surv. 
Circ. 831, 1980, 5 pp. 

31. Wegener, J.E. Profile on Bikita — Processed Petalite the New 
Priority. Ind. Miner. (London), No. 189, June 1981, pp. 51-53. 

32. Worobec, A.B.J, (ed.). 1982-83 Canadian Mines Handbook. 
Northern Miner Press Ltd., Toronto, June 1982, p. 192. 



c 



7ft 





++# 




o > 




++$ 







5 • «#> A* *■ 




*<W* ••$&*• "^ • life"' W* • A, V* •»: V** 

/ v : M : /% *°f2# /\ lie.- ** v \ 










*". o 



*bV 




r ^cy 



"o "*'"!!^7*" A <, ''o.l* .0 




o 





v^-y v^v v^-y v^v v^-> %-*•-■ 

**V : .HK „* V V llwi ^-V : .iiif. : ^ V -V. 








^0* 

V^ /jflfc ^ ;» \./ /jHfe\ «^ :MJk. \** 




,v * 



-<• 



y o^ 



4 A <* '°"'"* 















• ^s^tv^'. v? 













'A ^ 



O 



J ^S T 









Co 9 

„ yx '°%W. : r /\~--w^,\ ****** ; 
















,G V 'o, ^'V.s* ^A 



v^-y v 





















v^ 



■*■ «•; 














: V* 




'^^ .v^siBf- ^^ . c dsm>*\ '+*<$ 








+ * 



• rf$Xw.«/\. o 




*>0 V 



<U* 




4? >l^L'* * v •!••- 











***** 




.0* V *7^T*' A 








<& ' ' * & . X ' ' ^ 



a* V "V 




- ^0* ° V 




J* v^** A. 






A v 









V^' 




J ^<=>- 













v^^ 



^ v, v 




0^ ..•-.. V .** .^J^/^ 




J ^s- 






0^ ..•i.-..*o, 



^ V "V 









v^" /jSI&\ ^.,^ •i^A-. V^ /jS1&\ ^.^ ^i&'^ v^ 





j ^<>- 



A ^* 

^ v 








5> .^^'* *> 










^7 










» « x^ 






V » 



^ V_^% V / .t^% % A*\'- % % 





X ™ </ 




:- *W •' 








o/\- 



0^ o»_"'.. +t 







&% 



*' . . r* a <. *o . » * 









"-'BRAKY OF CON G R ESS 



I'»J/:J/I3J 



002 955 929 6 



